RISK FACTORS SUMMARY
Below is a summary of the material factors that make an investment in our securities speculative or risky. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this Risk Factors Summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” under Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, before making investment decisions regarding our securities.
We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history and no products approved for commercial sale, and have incurred substantial losses since our inception and anticipate incurring substantial and increasing losses for the foreseeable future.
Enrollment and retention of participants in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside our control, including difficulties in identifying patients, the availability of competitive products and significant competition for recruiting participants in clinical trials.
We will require substantial additional financing to achieve our goals, and failure to obtain additional capital when needed, or on acceptable terms to us, could cause us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts.
Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our current product candidates or any future product candidates.
Our clinical trials may reveal serious adverse events (“SAEs”) and significant adverse events (“AEs”) not seen in our preclinical studies or prior clinical trials and may result in a safety or tolerability profile that could delay or prevent regulatory approval or market acceptance of envudeucitinib (or “envu”), formerly known as ESK-001, A-005 or any future product candidates.
We face competition from entities that have made substantial investments into the rapid development of competitor treatments for immunological indications, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, many of which already have approved therapies and/or candidates under development in our current indications.
We are subject to various risks related to the acquisition and integration of ACELYRIN (as defined herein).
Our business is highly dependent on the success of our most advanced product candidate, envu, and we cannot guarantee that envu will successfully complete development, receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized. If we are unable to develop, receive regulatory approval for and ultimately successfully commercialize our product candidates, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.
The regulatory approval processes of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.
We are dependent on the services of our management team and other clinical and scientific personnel, and if we are not able to retain these individuals or recruit additional management or clinical and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.
Table of Contents
If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient intellectual property protection for our product candidates and any future product candidates we may develop, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors or other third parties could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected.
We cannot ensure that patent rights relating to inventions described and claimed in our or any current or future licensors and licensees pending patent applications will issue or that patents based on our or any current or future licensors and licensees patent applications will not be challenged and rendered invalid and/or unenforceable.
We have and may continue to form or seek collaborations or strategic alliances or enter into licensing arrangements in the future, and we may neither enter into, nor realize the benefits of, such alliances or licensing arrangements.
Even if we receive regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal. We may also be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.
Failure or perceived failure to comply with existing or future laws, regulations, contracts, self-regulatory schemes, standards, and other obligations related to data privacy or security (including security incidents) could harm our business. Compliance or the actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could increase our costs and otherwise negatively affect our operating results and business.
We may have conflicts with any current or future licensors, licensees, collaborators or strategic partners that could delay or prevent the development or commercialization of our product candidates.
Table of Contents
PART I
Item 1. Business
Overview
Our mission is to significantly improve the lives of patients by replacing broad immunosuppression with targeted therapies. Our name, Alumis, captures our mission to enlighten immunology, and is inspired by the words “allumer”—French for illuminate—and “immunis”—Latin for the immune system.
We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with an initial focus on developing our two Tyrosine Kinase 2 (“TYK2”) inhibitors: envudeucitinib (“envu”), formerly known as ESK-001, a second-generation inhibitor that we are developing to maximize target inhibition and optimize tolerability, and A-005, a central nervous system (“CNS”) penetrant allosteric TYK2 inhibitor. Envu is currently being evaluated in an ongoing Phase 2 open-label extension (“OLE”) trial, as well as a Phase 3 long-term extension (“LTE”) trial in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (“PsO”), and we plan to submit a New Drug Application (“NDA”) for envu in PsO to the FDA in the second half of 2026. Envu completed enrollment in the pivotal Phase 3 ONWARD1 and ONWARD2 clinical trials in patients with PsO, and we reported positive topline results in the first quarter of 2026. In addition, envu is currently being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (“SLE”), for which we expect to report topline results in the third quarter of 2026. We are currently evaluating additional immune-mediated disease indications for envu, beyond PsO and SLE, and for A-005 in CNS and peripheral diseases. In April 2024, we initiated our Phase 1 program of A-005 in healthy volunteers and reported initial results in December 2024. In addition, in connection with the ACELYRIN Merger (as defined below), we acquired lonigutamab, a subcutaneously delivered, monoclonal antibody targeting IGF-1R for the potential treatment of Thyroid Eye Disease (“TED”). We are continuing to evaluate the development program for lonigutamab and its potential differentiation in a capital efficient manner.
Alumis was incubated by Foresite Labs and incorporated on January 29, 2021, as a Delaware corporation under the name FL2021-001, Inc. FL2021-001, Inc.’s name was changed to Esker Therapeutics, Inc. in March 2021, and to Alumis Inc. in January 2022.
We utilize our proprietary precision data analytics platform, biological insights and team of experienced research and development experts to deepen our understanding of disease pathologies, accelerate research and development and increase the probability of clinical success. Our collective insights informed our selection of TYK2 as the target for our two lead programs. Beyond TYK2, our proprietary precision data analytics platform and drug discovery expertise have led to the identification of additional preclinical programs that exemplify our precision approach.
We recognize that patients living with immune-mediated diseases need alternatives to currently available therapies. Despite recent advances and innovations in the treatment of immune-mediated diseases, many patients continue to suffer, cycling through currently approved therapies while looking for a solution that alleviates the debilitating impact of their disease without life-limiting side effects.
Addressing the needs of these patients is why we exist. We are pioneering a precision approach that leverages insights derived from powerful data analytics to select the right target, right molecule, right indication, right patient, right endpoint and right combination to dramatically improve patient outcomes. We believe that combining our insights with an integrated approach to drug development will produce the next generation of treatments to address immune dysfunction.
ACELYRIN Merger
On February 6, 2025, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger, and, on April 20, 2025, we entered into an Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger (collectively the “Merger Agreement”) with ACELYRIN, Inc. (“ACELYRIN”) and Arrow Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and our direct wholly owned subsidiary (“Merger Sub”). Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub merged with and into ACELYRIN, with ACELYRIN continuing as our direct wholly owned subsidiary (the “ACELYRIN Merger”). The Merger Agreement was approved by the disinterested directors on our board of directors and the board of directors of ACELYRIN and was approved by the
Table of Contents
stockholders of each company on May 13, 2025. On May 21, 2025 (the “Closing Date”), we completed the ACELYRIN Merger in a common stock transaction valued at approximately $238.1 million settled through the issuance of 48,653,549 shares of our common stock to acquire net assets with a fair value of $426.0 million. See Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information.
Our Product Candidates and Pipeline
We are building a pipeline of molecules with the potential to address a broad range of immune-mediated diseases as monotherapy or combination therapies. Within our TYK2 franchise, we are developing our most advanced product candidate, envu, an allosteric TYK2 inhibitor for the treatment of PsO and SLE. We are developing our second TYK2 product candidate, A-005, as a CNS-penetrant allosteric TYK2 inhibitor, to offer the therapeutic benefit of TYK2 inhibition within the CNS for a broad range of neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases. In connection with the ACELYRIN Merger, we acquired lonigutamab, a subcutaneously delivered, monoclonal antibody targeting IGF-1R for the potential treatment of TED.
Our Strategy
Our mission is to significantly improve the lives of patients by replacing broad immunosuppression with targeted therapies. As our driving principle, we are using our precision approach focused on the important drivers of immune dysfunction. We use our key insights to pursue our mission of significantly improving outcomes for patients. We select drug targets that have been previously validated by strong human genetic evidence and human clinical data.
The core components of our business strategy include:
Maximize the opportunity presented by envu’s differentiated pharmacological profile and breadth of potential indications. We believe that envu is a foundational asset that exemplifies our approach. Genetic and biologic data generated to date highlight the important role of TYK2 inhibition across multiple diseases where we have current clinical programs (PsO and SLE) and future clinical ambitions. We intend to expand clinical development of envu to additional therapeutic areas and indications where TYK2 inhibition and our differentiated profile have the potential to deliver significant improvements for patients.
Expand our TYK2 franchise with A-005, our allosteric TYK2 inhibitor selected to penetrate the CNS to treat neuroinflammation. There is strong biological rationale for the involvement of TYK2 in neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases, as well as compelling genetic evidence for the role of TYK2 in MS. As a result, we believe TYK2 inhibition has potential utility in various neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases, including MS, Alzheimer’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (“ALS”), optic neuritis, neuromyelitis optica and Parkinson’s disease.
Discover and advance earlier-stage product candidates into clinical development. We intend to expand our pipeline of clinical-stage product candidates by identifying and developing earlier-stage assets. Utilizing our precision approach to address immune dysfunction, we have selected multiple additional targets to date, including interferon regulatory factor 5 (“IRF5”), across indications that are in various stages of development, from lead identification to lead optimization. These targets may enable development in a broad range of indications, either as a monotherapy or using a combination therapy approach with our TYK2 product candidate franchise.
Leverage our precision approach to increase speed of development, probability of success and precision of therapy. We leverage our proprietary precision data analytics platform that integrates key genetic and translational insights, with the aim to design efficient and effective development paths at every stage of our pipeline. We believe this approach can bring forth transformative medications by following the science to inform the right target, right molecule, right indication, right patient, right endpoint and right combinations.
Evaluate strategic collaborations to maximize the global impact of our product candidates. We plan to strategically evaluate potential partnerships to maximize the value of our lead programs and broader portfolio. We believe that our product candidates, indications, clinical data and data analytics make our company an
Table of Contents
attractive partner. Given our scientific expertise and significant therapeutic depth, and the broad addressable populations of our product candidates, the right partner could help us expand the breadth of indications we pursue and increase our commercial reach.
Immune Dysfunction Overview
The immune system is a highly regulated and balanced system that has evolved to protect us from infection, recognize and neutralize harmful agents from the environment and fight disease. Dysfunctional immune responses, whether directed towards self or non-self or through unbalanced activation or regulation, can lead to inflammation, allergy, autoimmunity and development of chronic immune-mediated diseases. We are building immune insights from patient samples, incorporating genetic, genomic and proteomic learnings, and translating preclinical findings in an effort to therapeutically target dysfunctional immune mechanisms to improve outcomes for patients with immune-mediated diseases.
Role of TYK2 in Immunology
TYK2 is an intracellular tyrosine kinase protein within the broader Janus kinase (“JAK”) family shown to play an essential role in mediating cytokine receptor signaling pathways in both innate and adaptive immunity. Cytokines are a group of proteins in the body that play an important role in boosting the immune system. TYK2 associates with a defined set of cytokine receptors expressed primarily on immune cells, such as IL-23, IL-12 and type I interferon (“IFN”) receptors, distinct from other JAK family members. TYK2 functions to relay signals into the cell through phosphorylation of signal transducing and activators of transcription (STATs), to initiate a cascade of protein-signaling interactions resulting in cytokine-responsive gene transcription and cell activation, which drives downstream immune responses including Th17, IL-17 pathways, and type I IFN responsive genes that are known drivers of inflammation and immune mediated disease. Therapeutic inhibition of TYK2 and associated cytokine pathways, in particular IL-23/IL-17 and type I IFN, have been broadly validated to address immune dysfunction in immune-mediated diseases, such as psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and SLE. TYK2 is expressed in circulating and tissue-resident immune cells, and is also active in CNS-resident immune cells, such as microglia, which are thought to play a key role in neuroinflammation.
Human genetic studies of TYK2 strongly validated it as a therapeutic target. An identified loss-of-function mutation (“P1104A”) in the TYK2 gene, present in approximately 3% to 5% of European populations, is protective against an array of immune-mediated disorders, including SLE, psoriasis, sarcoidosis, psoriatic arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease and neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative conditions, such as MS. Importantly, this TYK2 variant does not appear to significantly increase susceptibility to serious infections. We believe that TYK2 inhibition as a targeted therapy may have an improved risk to benefit profile as compared to broad immune suppression.
TYK2 inhibition represents a breadth of opportunity, and there have been or are ongoing clinical trials of TYK2 inhibitors in multiple indications such as psoriatic arthritis, SLE, cutaneous lupus, alopecia areata, Sjogren’s disease, vitiligo, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.
Our TYK2 Franchise
Envu: Our Allosteric TYK2 Inhibitor
Envu is a potent, highly selective, allosteric TYK2 inhibitor.
Key Differentiating Features
We believe envu is differentiated from first-generation TYK2 inhibitors for the following reasons:
Intrinsic Selectivity and Preclinical Pharmacology . Due to envu’s design as an allosteric inhibitor, the molecule is both potent and intrinsically selective for TYK2 over other protein kinases, including the related JAK family members. No JAK-related pharmacology has been observed with envu to date.
Optimized Molecular Properties and Pharmacokinetics (“PK”) . At the core of envu’s differentiation from
Table of Contents
other clinical-stage allosteric inhibitors of TYK2 are its physicochemical properties that we believe impart highly desirable drug-like features. Envu is highly permeable with low efflux resulting in high and rapid systemic absorption and favorable tissue distribution in vivo . These properties result in its highly predictable, linear PK profile in humans with low variability. In addition, envu has a desirable half-life in humans of approximately 8 to 12 hours and we have not observed any concerns for drug-drug interactions with other therapies.
Maximal Target Inhibition. Envu demonstrated a robust and predictable PK/PD relationship in Phase 1 studies, enabling the identification of a dose level that achieved maximal TYK2 inhibition for 24 hours a day to take into Phase 2 clinical trials. We define maximal inhibition as reaching the plateau of biological inhibition in the assay readout with no further impact seen with higher drug concentrations. At the 40 mg BID dose, maximal TYK2 inhibition was confirmed in healthy volunteer and PsO patient blood samples by RNA-seq analysis, and a return to non-lesional baseline levels of TYK2 pathway (including IFN signature, IL-23, IL-17) and PsO-relevant disease biomarkers was confirmed in PsO patient skin biopsies.
Clinical Tolerability. There have been no clinically limiting findings across our clinical trials to date that prevent envu from being dosed to achieve maximal target inhibition. In contrast to what has been reported with first-generation allosteric TYK2 inhibitors, skin rashes have been observed at much lower frequency with envu to date, even at very high and sustained levels of target inhibition, suggesting that skin toxicities may not be an on-target, class effect of TYK2 inhibitors.
Strategic Indication Selection
TYK2-mediated cytokine signaling is involved in a broad range of immune-mediated diseases. TYK2 loss-of-function mutations have been shown to be protective for several conditions including psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and MS. Therefore, envu has the potential to provide benefit in a large number of indications. We have selected PsO and SLE as our initial indications.
Combination Potential
Despite significant advances in the treatment of immune-mediated disease, in many diseases, only a minority of patients achieve disease remission or nearly complete response with current therapies. Because of the complexity, overlap and redundancy of inflammatory pathways, combination approaches targeting complementary pathways may be needed to achieve high-hurdle endpoints such as remission. We believe that envu’s pharmacological properties, including its lack of drug-drug interaction potential and its clinical profile, positions it well as a partner for future combination therapies.
Development
Envu is currently being evaluated in an ongoing Phase 2 open-label extension trial, as well as a parallel Phase 3 LTE trial in patients with PsO, as well as in a Phase 2b clinical trial in SLE.
Envu for the Treatment of PsO
Psoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated skin disease characterized by abnormal epidermal growth, usually presenting as red, scaly patches, papules or plaques (plaque psoriasis). Patients with psoriasis are also at increased risk of developing other co-morbid conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, obesity, insulin resistance, uveitis, arthritis and thyroid dysfunction. According to the World Health Organization, psoriasis significantly impacts quality of life—physical and emotional challenges of disfiguration, low self- esteem, loss of productivity and depression.
On January 6, 2026 we announced positive topline results from our Phase 3 ONWARD1 and ONWARD2 global Phase 3, multi-center, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials, evaluating envu in patients with PsO. Envu met all primary and secondary endpoints with high statistical significance in both trials. In each of these trials, envu achieved superior skin clearance compared with placebo (p < 0.0001) on the co-primary endpoints of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (“PASI”) 75, and static Physician’s Global Assessment (“sPGA”) 0/1 at Week 16. On average across both ONWARD1 and ONWARD2, 74% of patients achieved PASI 75 and 59% of patients achieved sPGA 0/1, with responses
Table of Contents
deepening over time. Rapid responses were observed, with clear separation from placebo on PASI 90 as early as Week 4. At Week 24, on the higher hurdle skin clearance measures, approximately 65% of patients achieved PASI 90 and more than 40% achieved PASI 100, on average across both trials. In addition, consistent and clinically meaningful improvements across patient-reported outcomes relating to itch and quality of life were observed. Envu also achieved superior skin clearance compared with apremilast in each trial (p<0.0001) on all PASI endpoints at Week 24. We also announced that treatment with envu was generally well tolerated through Week 24 in both trials, with a safety profile consistent with our Phase 2 trial for envu in PsO, including the LTE trial. Treatment-emergent adverse event (“TEAE”) frequency and severity were similar across ONWARD1 and ONWARD2, with the majority being mild to moderate, transient, and responding to standard therapy, if required. The most common TEAEs were headaches, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infections, and acne. No safety signals were observed. See “—Safety Profile of Envu” below for further information.
We plan to submit an NDA for envu in PsO to the FDA in the second half of 2026.
Envu for the Treatment of SLE
SLE is a chronic autoimmune disease predominantly affecting women at childbearing age. Clinical manifestations are highly heterogeneous, and the disease typically waxes and wanes, with flares and periods of relative remission. Certain loss-of-function variants of TYK2 significantly decrease the risk of SLE. While mortality in SLE has decreased since the mid-20th century as a result of improved treatments, the disease remains associated with increased disability and loss of social and occupational functioning and high utilization of health care resources.
We are currently conducting LUMUS, a Phase 2b, 48-week, global, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, clinical trial evaluating envu in patients with moderate-to-severe active SLE, in the United States, Europe, the United Kingdom (“UK”), Latin America and Asia-Pacific (“APAC”) countries. The primary endpoint in Part A of such trial is BILAG-Based Composite Lupus Assessment response (a validated composite measure of lupus disease activity) at Week 48. Eligible patients may enroll in Part B (an OLE) or participate in a four-week follow-up period.
Safety Profile of Envu
Envu has been administered to more than 2,000 participants and in some cases administered for up to three years. Envu has been generally well-tolerated in our Phase 2 STRIDE and OLE and Phase 3 ONWARD clinical trials to date, with the majority of AEs observed in such clinical trials having been graded mild-to-moderate in severity. As of December 31, 2025, the most common AEs reported by patients across active (envu) trial arms were headaches, upper respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis and acne, and the most common AEs deemed related to study drug by the principal investigator included headaches, upper respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis, rash and nausea. The safety profile of envu continues to be evaluated in our ongoing Phase 2 OLE in PsO, Phase 3 LTE trial in PsO, and our Phase 2b trial in SLE.
Envu is an allosteric inhibitor of TYK2. TYK2 is an intracellular tyrosine kinase protein shown to play an essential role in mediating cytokine receptor signaling pathways in both innate and adaptive immunity. Cytokines are a group of proteins in the body that play an important role in boosting the immune system. Other TYK2 inhibitors, such as deucravacitinib (marketed as Sotyktu which is approved for the treatment of adults with PsO), have shown AEs such as hypersensitivity reactions, infections, tuberculosis, malignancy and rhabdomyolysis. The label for deucravacitinib includes a warning concerning the potential for JAK-related adverse events, such as cardiovascular and thrombotic events. Given our similar mechanism of action, we closely monitor and characterize these potential safety risks in our clinical studies. We have observed and expect to continue to observe that additional AEs and SAEs, consistent with known side effects of TYK2 inhibition, may emerge in our ongoing and future clinical trials of envu, and we have also observed and expect to continue to observe trial participant withdrawals or discontinuations due to AEs.
A-005: Our CNS-Penetrant Allosteric TYK2 Inhibitor
The second clinical product candidate in our TYK2 franchise, A-005, is a highly differentiated, CNS-penetrant, allosteric TYK2 inhibitor that has potential applications in multiple sclerosis and other neurological diseases. as well as peripheral diseases. A loss-of-function mutation in the TYK2 gene has been shown by our proprietary genetic data set as well as scientific literature, to reduce the risk of developing MS. We are currently evaluating indications for our A-005 program
Table of Contents
and intend to provide an update on an A-005 Phase 2 trial commencement following completion of this evaluation.
Role of TYK2 in Neuroinflammatory and Neurodegenerative Diseases
TYK2 pathways are active in CNS-resident immune cells and may play a localized role in the CNS contributing to the pathology of several CNS inflammatory disorders, including MS. Genome-wide association studies (“GWAS”) have shown the loss-of-function TYK2 genetic variant, P1104A, has a protective effect for the development of MS. An additional missense variant in TYK2, Rs35018800, has the largest effect on MS risk of any variant outside the MHC/HLA region discovered to date. In addition to its genetic association with MS, TYK2 is known to be expressed and functionally active in CNS-resident microglia. Microglia express IL-23 and interferon receptors and IL-23/IL-12 cytokines have been shown to localize to MS lesions. Activated microglia are associated with disease worsening in MS, and TYK2 inhibitors with adequate CNS exposure may provide an opportunity to target neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration. We believe TYK2 inhibition has the potential to treat the neuroinflammatory component of other neurodegenerative diseases where activated microglia and/or TYK2 proinflammatory cytokines including interferon are implicated such as Alzheimer’s disease, ALS, optic neuritis, neuromyelitis optica, and Parkinson’s disease.
Development
A-005 for the Treatment of MS
MS is a chronic immune-mediated disease of the central nervous system. This condition causes a wide range of physical and cognitive challenges for those afflicted, often resulting in neurological symptoms and disabilities. Despite available treatments to manage symptoms and slow disease progression, treatments are limited for progressive disease and a definitive cure remains elusive. Agents directly targeting the CNS pathology and CNS resident cells, including activated microglia, are of increasing interest as these are thought to impact progressive neurological impairment. The unmet need lies in finding safe and more effective targeted therapies that can halt or reverse disease progression, alleviating the burden on patients and their families and improving their overall quality of life.
In December 2024, we announced positive data from a Phase 1 clinical trial evaluating the safety, tolerability and PK of single- and multiple-ascending doses of A-005 in healthy participants. In the clinical trial, A-005 was well tolerated with no SAEs reported.
Our Lonigutamab (IGF-1R Monoclonal Antibody) Program
Lonigutamab is a subcutaneously delivered, monoclonal antibody targeting IGF-1R for the treatment of TED, a potentially vision-threatening progressive autoimmune ocular disease in which the eye muscles, eyelids, tear glands and fatty tissues behind the eye become inflamed.
ACELYRIN announced data from its Phase 1/2 dose ranging trial of lonigutamab in TED in March 2024 and January 2025. We are continuing to evaluate the development program for lonigutamab and its potential differentiation in a capital efficient manner.
Our Discovery Programs
We are building a pipeline of molecules with the potential to address a broad range of immune-mediated diseases. We pursue drug targets that have been previously validated by strong human genetic evidence or human clinical data. Our drug discovery efforts for our selected targets take advantage of structure-guided approaches built from public or proprietary crystallographic structures to enable use of advanced computational methods. These approaches enable optimization of traditional protein modulators, protein degraders, and targeted covalent inhibitors as appropriate. In addition, we have chosen targets that could be complementary for use in combination with our existing TYK2 franchise and to each other.
For example, IRF5 is a transcription factor that mediates signaling of several cytokines including type I IFN, IL-6, IL-12, IL-23, and TNF. It is a genetically supported target across multiple immune indications with known functional roles in
Table of Contents
both innate and adaptive immunity. IRF5 has been implicated in macrophage polarization, cell growth regulation, and apoptosis. It acts on innate immune responses via recognition of upstream self-nucleic acid-containing immune complexes and pathogens by toll like receptors (“TLR”), specifically: TLR7, TLR8 and TLR9 in the endosome via MyD88. Translocation of IRF5 to the nucleus following phosphorylation by IKK β is critical to the pathogenesis of many immune mediated diseases. Genome-wide association studies have identified several functional genetic variants in IRF5 that predispose patients to immune-mediated diseases including, but not limited to SLE, systemic sclerosis, and primary sclerosing cholangitis.
We are actively engaged in lead generation activities to identify small molecules that can precisely bind and block IRF5 function. These efforts are aided by our proprietary crystal structure of our compounds bound to IRF5, which enables computational approaches to optimize binders for either IRF5 inhibition or degradation. We have developed several proprietary assays including a biochemical dimerization assay that has been used in conjunction with high-throughput screening to identify leads. In addition, we have applied an orthogonal method to identify small-molecule binders that may target allosteric pockets providing inhibition directly or as a component in a proteolysis-targeting chimera. We will pursue multiple mechanisms of inhibition and use our extensive pharmacology expertise to guide the final selection of clinical candidates.
Foresite Labs Services Agreement
Foresite Labs, LLC (“Foresite Labs”) was an original stockholder in, and actively involved in our incubation. We and Foresite Labs have had an ongoing services agreement since our inception, with Foresite Labs originally providing incubation services, development assistance and oversight, and data analytics services; currently, Foresite Labs provides data analytics services related to our TYK2 franchise, our discovery programs and to our business development activities. The original Services Agreement between us and Foresite Labs was entered into in January 2021, was amended and restated in August 2021, was amended and restated for a second time in December 2023, and expires in December 2026, unless terminated earlier by the parties. Work under the Services Agreement is memorialized in a series of Statements of Work and we pay Foresite Labs for the estimated costs of its services in advance on a quarterly basis, with a true-up to actuals at the end of each quarter.
Intellectual Property
We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to our business, including by seeking, maintaining, enforcing and defending patent rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing patent applications in the United States and in jurisdictions outside of the United States related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements and product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology, assays and product candidates, and may in the future rely on in-licensing opportunities, to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in our field. Our commercial success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our technology, inventions and improvements; to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; to obtain and maintain any future licenses to use intellectual property owned by third parties; and to defend and enforce our proprietary rights, including our patent rights.
As of December 31, 2025, our solely owned patent portfolio included five issued U.S. patents, three pending U.S. provisional patent applications, over ten pending non-provisional U.S. patent applications, and over twenty granted foreign patents.
Envu and A-005
In regard to envu and A-005, we own one patent family with claims directed to composition of matter and methods of use that includes five issued U.S. patents, one pending U.S. patent application, over fifteen granted foreign patents in Europe (each validated in over 35 countries), and certain other countries, and over 10 foreign patent applications pending in various jurisdictions, such as Europe and Japan. Not accounting for any patent term adjustment or extensions or terminal disclaimers, and assuming that all applicable annuity and/or maintenance fees are paid timely, the issued patents, and, if granted, the pending patent applications in this family, are expected to expire in 2039.
Table of Contents
We also own three patent families with claims directed to crystalline and salt forms of envu, which includes three pending U.S. applications, and over 30 foreign patent applications pending in various jurisdictions such as Europe and Japan. Not accounting for any patent term adjustment or extension and assuming that all applicable annuity and/or maintenance fees are paid timely, the patent applications, if issued, and any patent applications claiming the benefit of these PCT applications, if issued, will be expected to expire in 2043.
We own one patent family with claims directed to methods of treating a TYK2-mediated disease using envu, that includes a pending U.S. application and over 10 foreign applications pending in various jurisdictions such as Europe and Japan. Not accounting for any patent term adjustment or extension and assuming that all applicable annuity and/or maintenance fees are paid timely, any patent applications, if issued, will be expected to expire in 2043.
We own three additional patent families that disclose and/or contain claims directed to methods of treating various diseases with envu that include two pending U.S. non-provisional applications, four pending foreign applications and one pending U.S. provisional application. Not accounting for any patent term adjustment or extension and assuming that all annuity and/or maintenance fees are paid timely, patent applications from these patent families, if issued, will be expected to expire between 2044 and 2046.
We own three pending PCT applications and three additional foreign applications with claims directed to crystalline and salt forms of A-005, one pending PCT application and one additional foreign application with claims directed to methods of treating various diseases with A-005, one pending PCT application and one additional foreign application with claims directed to processes for making envu, and one pending PCT application and one additional foreign application with claims directed to formulations of envu. Not accounting for any patent term adjustment or extension and assuming that all applicable annuity and/or maintenance fees are paid timely, any patent applications claiming priority to the provisional applications, if issued, will be expected to expire in 2045.
We intend to pursue, in the normal course of business and when possible, composition, method of use, process, dosing and formulation patent protection for the product candidates we develop and commercialize. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and immunotherapy development processes and technology. When available to expand market exclusivity, we intend to strategically obtain or license additional intellectual property related to current or contemplated product candidates.
Lonigutamab
As of December 31, 2025, we exclusively in-licensed from Pierre Fabre Medicament SAS (“Pierre Fabre”) two issued U.S. patents, over 55 corresponding foreign patents and 5 foreign patent applications directed to composition of matter. Such issued patents are expected to expire in 2035, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustment or extensions and assuming payment of all appropriate fees. The portfolio further includes 12 pending patent applications directed primarily to formulations and methods of use. Patents, if issued from these pending applications are expected to expire in 2043 or 2045, respectively, without giving effect to any potential patent term extensions and patent term adjustments, and assuming payment of all appropriate fees.
For more information regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, see Item 1A. “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Intellectual Property.”
Sales and Marketing
Given our stage of development, we have not yet established a full commercial organization or distribution capabilities. We have stage-appropriate commercial capabilities and we intend to build a commercial infrastructure to support sales of any approved products. We also intend to continue evaluating opportunities to work with partners that enhance our capabilities with respect to the development and commercialization of our product candidates, if approved. In addition, we intend to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, in key markets in the United States, the European Union (“EU”) and APAC, either alone or with partners in order to maximize the worldwide commercial potential of our programs.
Table of Contents
Manufacturing
We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for clinical testing, as well as for manufacture of any products that we may commercialize, if approved. To date, we have obtained active pharmaceutical ingredients (“API”) for envu and A-005 for our preclinical and clinical testing from different third-party API manufacturers and bulk drug product from other third-party manufacturers. We obtain our preclinical and clinical supplies from these manufacturers on a purchase order basis and currently do not have long-term supply arrangements in place. Our principal suppliers of critical raw materials are located in India and in Taiwan. We are in the process of implementing a redundant supply chain for envu API, drug product and critical raw material. For all our product candidates, we intend to identify and qualify redundant manufacturers to provide the API and drug product and prior to submission of the NDA to the FDA and/or a marketing authorization application to the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) and/or other health authorities. envu and A-005 are compounds of low molecular weight, generally called small molecules. Envu can be manufactured in reliable and reproducible processes from readily available starting materials. A-005 has been produced in small quantities to support our preclinical studies and is currently being manufactured at larger quantities for clinical testing. The chemistries for envu and A-005 are amenable to scale-up and do not require unusual equipment in the manufacturing process. Additional contract manufacturers are used to package, label, and distribute investigational drug products. This strategy allows us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure, avoid depending on our own manufacturing facility and equipment while simultaneously enabling us to focus our expertise on developing our products. We expect to continue to develop product candidates that can be produced cost-effectively at contract manufacturing facilities.
Competition
The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Our potential competitors include large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and generic drug companies. Many of our potential competitors have greater financial and technical human resources than we do, as well as equal or greater experience in the discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of products and the commercialization of those products. Accordingly, our potential competitors may be more successful than us in achieving regulatory approvals and commercializing their drugs. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition from existing, approved drugs, as well as new drugs entering the market and emerging technologies that become available. Finally, the development of new treatment methods for the diseases we are targeting could render our product candidates non-competitive or obsolete.
We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our product candidates, if approved, will be efficacy, safety, tolerability profile, convenience of dosing, price and coverage by governmental and third-party payors.
We are currently developing envu for the treatment of PsO and SLE, with multiple other potential indications to follow. Other emerging and established life sciences companies have been focused on similar therapeutics. If approved, envu would compete with several currently approved or late-stage oral clinical therapeutics in each such indication as well as other drugs used to treat such patients.
Our second TYK2 product candidate, A-005, is a highly differentiated CNS-penetrant allosteric TYK2 inhibitor that has a potential application in MS and other neuroinflammatory diseases. In MS, there are a large number of therapies available for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS, including interferon beta regulators, monoclonal antibodies, synthetic immunomodulatory drugs, and S1P receptor modulators.
Coverage and Reimbursement
Successful sales of approved drug products in the U.S. market will depend, in part, on the extent to which such drugs will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health programs or private health insurance (including managed care plans). Patients who are provided with prescriptions as part of their medical treatment generally rely on such third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their prescriptions and therefore adequate coverage and reimbursement from such third-party payors are critical to new and ongoing product acceptance. Coverage and
Table of Contents
reimbursement policies for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor as there is no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products among third-party payors in the United States. There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement as the process of determining coverage and reimbursement is often time consuming and costly. Further, third-party payors are increasingly reducing reimbursements for medical drugs and services and implementing measures to control utilization of drugs (such as requiring prior authorization for coverage).
Additionally, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments, and the prices of drugs have been a focus in this effort. The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic drugs. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least seven years and biologics that have been on the market for at least 11 years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to 20 products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. Adoption or expansion of price controls and cost-containment measures could further limit manufacturers’ net revenue and results. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for a manufacturer’s drug products or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover its drug products could have a material adverse effect on the manufacturer’s sales, results of operations and financial condition.
General legislative cost control measures may also affect reimbursement for drug products. Manufacturers that obtain approval to market a drug candidate in the United States may be subject to spending reductions affecting Medicare, Medicaid or other publicly funded or subsidized health programs and/or any significant taxes or fees.
Government Regulation
Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries and jurisdictions extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries and jurisdictions, along with subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations and other regulatory authorities, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.
U.S. Drug and Biologic Development Process
In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and its implementing regulations. Biologics are additionally subject to the Public Health Service Act and its implementing regulations. The process required by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:
completion of nonclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies in accordance with Good Laboratory Practice regulations (“GLPs”) and other applicable regulations;
submission to the FDA of an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;
approval by an independent institutional review board (“IRB”) or ethics committee at each clinical site before each trial may be initiated;
performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with Good Clinical Practice regulations (“GCPs”) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the drug for its intended use;
Table of Contents
submission to the FDA of an NDA or Biologics License Application (“BLA”);
a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of the NDA or BLA to file the submission for review;
satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the product is produced to assess compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”) requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve its identity, strength, quality and purity, and of inspection of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with GCPs; and
FDA review and approval of the NDA or BLA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States.
Nonclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the nonclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLPs, where applicable. The results of nonclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls (“CMC”), and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long-term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin.
Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCPs, which are standards meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND.
The FDA may order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. The study protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an IRB for approval before a clinical trial commences at the relevant institution. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions on the conduct of the study.
Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the investigational product into healthy subjects or patients, safety, dosage tolerance, metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects and, if possible, to early evidence on effectiveness are assessed. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population with the specified disease or conditions to evaluate the effectiveness of the investigational product for a particular indication, to determine optimal dose and regimen, and to identify common AEs and safety risks. If preliminary evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile is obtained in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 trials are conducted. Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in an expanded patient population, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the investigational product and to provide adequate information for labeling.
In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a product. A single Phase 3 trial may be sufficient (1) where the study is a large, multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible or (2) when the single trial is supported by confirmatory evidence.
Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These
Table of Contents
trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA or BLA.
Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMPs. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the finished product. In addition, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.
U.S. Review and Approval Process
After completion of the required clinical testing, the sponsor prepares and submits an NDA or BLA to the FDA. FDA approval of the application is required before marketing and distribution of the product may begin in the United States. The application must include, among other information, the results of all nonclinical, clinical, and other testing along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the product, and proposed labeling. The cost of preparing and submitting an application is substantial. The submission of most applications is additionally subject to a substantial user fee. Under an approved NDA or BLA, the applicant is also subject to an annual program fee. These fees are typically increased annually.
The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA or BLA to determine whether the application will be filed based on the FDA’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission is filed, the FDA begins an in-depth review. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, as amended (“PDUFA”), the FDA has agreed to certain performance goals. The FDA’s goal is to review and act on applications granted Standard Review within ten months of the date the FDA files the application. For applications granted a Priority Review, the FDA’s goal is to review the application within six months from the date the FDA files the application. The FDA may extend its PDUFA goal date for reviewing both standard and priority-review applications for three additional months to allow the FDA to consider certain late-submitted information or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission.
The FDA may also refer applications for novel products, as well as those that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee—typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts—for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.
Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will generally inspect the facility or the facilities at which the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve a product unless the facility at which it is manufactured has a satisfactory cGMP compliance status.
After the FDA evaluates the NDA or BLA and completes any clinical and manufacturing site inspections, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with prescribing information for specific indications. A complete response letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete, and the application will not be approved in its present form. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the application and may require substantial additional testing or information that must be provided in order for the FDA to reconsider the application for approval. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the application, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months from the date of receipt, depending on the type of information included.
As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”) to help ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use (“ETASU”). ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring,
Table of Contents
and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. Moreover, the FDA may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the product’s safety or efficacy.
FDA Expedited Development and Review Programs
The FDA has a number of programs intended to expedite the development or review of a marketing application for an investigational product. For example, the Fast Track designation program is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for developing and reviewing drug products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, investigational drugs and biologics are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or condition. The sponsor of a Fast Track designated investigational product has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once an NDA or BLA is submitted, the application may be eligible for priority review. The FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA or BLA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the application, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the application and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the application.
A drug biologic intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may also be eligible for Breakthrough Therapy designation to expedite its development and review. Breakthrough Therapy designation is provided if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug or biologic, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the Fast Track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance beginning as early as Phase 1 and an organizational commitment to expedite the development and review of the product, including involvement of senior managers.
Any drug or biologic product submitted to the FDA for approval may also be eligible for Priority Review. An NDA or BLA is eligible for Priority Review if the product is designed to treat a serious condition, and if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or efficacy compared to available therapies. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application designated for priority review.
Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, and Priority Review do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process. Even if a product candidate qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.
Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information
Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including investigational drugs, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information on ClinicalTrials.gov. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, study sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.
Pediatric Information
Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, NDAs, BLAs or supplements thereto must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is determined by the FDA to be safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers or deferrals for submission of data. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric clinical trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric clinical trials begin. The
Table of Contents
FDA must send a non-compliance letter to any sponsor that fails to submit the required assessment, keep a deferral current or submit a request for approval of a pediatric formulation.
The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (“BPCA”) provides NDA and BLA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity—patent or nonpatent—for a product if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of the product in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, the FDA making a “written request” for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications or supplements to an approved application that propose a labeling change as a result of pediatric studies conducted pursuant to the BPCA are treated as priority applications or supplements, with all of the benefits that designation confers.
Post-Approval Requirements
Any products manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, many changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, certain manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval.
Drug and biologic manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the FDA inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMP. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with cGMP.
The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of requirements for post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;
warning or untitled letters;
clinical holds on clinical studies;
refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of product approvals;
product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products;
consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs;
mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and the issuance of corrective information;
the issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases and other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; or
injunctions, fines or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
Table of Contents
The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of drugs and biologics that are placed on the market. Advertising and promotion of drugs and biologics must be in compliance with the FDCA and its implementing regulations and only for the approved indications and in a manner consistent with the approved labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability, including investigation by federal and state authorities.
Foreign Drug Development Processes
In addition to regulations in the United States, we are and will continue to be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials, authorization, and any commercial sales and distribution of our products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval of a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. Many countries outside of the United States have a process similar to that in the United States that requires the submission of a clinical trial application (“CTA”) much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical trials.
Although in countries outside of the EU, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country in all cases, the clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.
If we or our potential collaborators fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension, variation or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.
Clinical Trials in the EU
Similarly to the United States, the various phases of non-clinical and clinical research in the EU are subject to significant regulatory controls.
In the EU, clinical trials are governed by the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 (the “CTR”), which entered into application on January 31, 2022, repealing and replacing the former Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20 (the “CTD”).
The CTR is intended to harmonize and streamline CTA, simplify adverse-event reporting procedures, improve the supervision of clinical trials and increase transparency. Specifically, the regulation, which is directly applicable in all EU member states, introduces a streamlined application procedure through a single-entry point, the “EU portal”; the Clinical Trials Information System (“CTIS”); a single set of documents to be prepared and submitted for the application; as well as simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors. A harmonized procedure for the assessment of applications for clinical trials has been introduced and is divided into two parts. Part I assessment is led by the competent authorities of a reference member state selected by the trial sponsor and relates to clinical trial aspects that are considered to be scientifically harmonized across EU member states. This assessment is then submitted to the competent authorities of all concerned member states in which the trial is to be conducted for their review. Part II is assessed separately by the competent authorities and ethics committees in each concerned EU member state, i.e., all EU member states in which a clinical trial is to be conducted. Individual EU member states retain the power to authorize the conduct of clinical trials on their territory.
The CTR foresaw a three-year transition period that ended on January 31, 2025. Since this date, all new or ongoing trials are subject to the provisions of the CTR.
Medicinal products used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with the guidelines on GMP and in a GMP certified facility, which is subject to GMP inspections.
Review and Approval Process of Medicinal Products in the EU
Table of Contents
In the EU, medicinal products can only be commercialized after a related marketing authorization (“MA”) has been granted. To obtain an MA for a medicinal product in the EU, an applicant must submit a Marketing Authorization Application (“MAA”), either in accordance with a centralized procedure administered by the EMA, or one of the procedures administered by the competent authorities of EU member states (decentralized procedure, national procedure or mutual recognition procedure). An MA may be granted only to an applicant established in the EU.
A successful application in accordance with the centralized procedure results in the grant of a single MA by the European Commission that is valid throughout the EU. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, the centralized procedure is compulsory for specific products, including for (i) medicinal products derived from biotechnological processes, (ii) products designated as orphan medicinal products, (iii) advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”), and (iv) products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases. For products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of other diseases and products that are highly innovative or for which a centralized process is in the interest of patients, authorization through the centralized procedure is optional on related approval.
In accordance with the centralized procedure, the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (the “CHMP”), conducts the initial assessment of an application for authorization of a medicinal product. The CHMP is also responsible for several post-authorization and maintenance activities, such as the assessment of variations or extensions to an existing MA. The maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA under the centralized procedure is 210 days, excluding clock stops during which additional information or written or oral explanations are provided by the applicant in response to questions of the CHMP. Accelerated assessment may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product that targets an unmet medical need is expected to be of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts a request for accelerated assessment, the time limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days (excluding clock stops). The CHMP can, however, revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.
Unlike the centralized authorization procedure, the decentralized MA procedure requires a separate application to, and leads to separate approval by, the competent authorities of each EU member state in which the product is to be marketed. This application is identical to the application that would be submitted to the EMA for authorization through the centralized procedure. The reference EU member state prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid MAA. The resulting assessment report is submitted to the concerned EU member states who, within 90 days of receipt, must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a concerned EU member state cannot approve the assessment report and related materials due to concerns relating to a potential serious risk to public health, disputed elements may be referred to the Heads of Medicines Agencies’ Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralized Procedures — Human (“CMDh”) for review. The subsequent decision of the European Commission is binding on all EU member states.
The mutual recognition procedure allows companies that have a medicinal product already authorized in one EU member state to apply for this authorization to be recognized by the competent authorities in other EU member states. Like the decentralized procedure, the mutual recognition procedure is based on the acceptance by the competent authorities of the EU member states of the MA granted in relation to a medicinal product by the competent authorities of other EU member states. The holder of a national MA may submit an application to the competent authority of an EU member state requesting that this authority recognize the MA delivered by the competent authority of another EU member state.
An MA has, in principle, an initial validity of five years. The MA may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk-benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the EU member state in which the original MA was granted. To support the application, the MA holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the Common Technical Document providing up-to-date data concerning the quality, safety and efficacy of the product, including all variations introduced since the MA was granted, at least nine months before the MA ceases to be valid. The European Commission or the competent authorities of the EU member states may decide on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one further five-year renewal period for the MA. Once subsequently definitively renewed, the MA shall be valid for an unlimited period. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the medicinal product on the EU market (for a centralized MA) or on the market of the authorizing
Table of Contents
EU member state within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause) unless, in justified circumstances, authorization is extended.
Innovative products that target an unmet medical need and are expected to be of major public health interest may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the PRIority MEdicines (“PRIME”) scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicinal products that target unmet medical needs. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need; i.e., where there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the EU or, if there is, the new medicinal product will bring a major therapeutic advantage. The products must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods of therapy or improving existing ones. Benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and potentially accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted.
In the EU, a “conditional” MA may be granted in cases where all the required safety and efficacy data are not yet available. The European Commission may grant a conditional MA for a medicinal product if it is demonstrated that all of the following criteria are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the medicinal product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorization; (iii) the medicinal product fulfils an unmet medical need; and (iv) the benefit of the immediate availability to patients of the medicinal product is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. The conditional MA is subject to conditions to be fulfilled for generating the missing data or ensuring increased safety measures. It is valid for one year and must be renewed annually until all related conditions have been fulfilled. Once any pending studies are provided, the conditional MA can be converted into a standard MA. However, if the conditions are not fulfilled within the timeframe set by the EMA and approved by the European Commission, the MA will cease to be renewed.
An MA may also be granted “under exceptional circumstances” where the applicant can show that it is unable to provide comprehensive data on efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use even after the product has been authorized and subject to specific procedures being introduced. These circumstances may arise in particular when the intended indications are very rare and, in the state of scientific knowledge at that time, it is not possible to provide comprehensive information, or when generating data may be contrary to generally accepted ethical principles. Like a conditional MA, an MA granted in exceptional circumstances is reserved to medicinal products intended to be authorized for treatment of rare diseases or unmet medical needs for which the applicant does not hold a complete data set that is required for the grant of a standard MA. However, unlike the conditional MA, an applicant for authorization in exceptional circumstances is not subsequently required to provide the missing data. Although the MA “under exceptional circumstances” is granted definitively, the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product is reviewed annually, and the MA will be withdrawn if the risk-benefit ratio is no longer favorable.
Pediatric Development in the EU
In the EU, Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 provides that all MAAs for new medicinal products must include the results of trials conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a pediatric investigation plan (“PIP”) agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee (“PDCO”). The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the medicinal product for which MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures provided in the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data are not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Once the MA is obtained in all EU member states and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for a six-month extension to the Supplementary Protection Certificate (“SPC”), if any is in effect at the time of authorization or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of orphan market exclusivity.
Data and Market Exclusivity in the EU
Table of Contents
The EU provides opportunities for data and market exclusivity related to MAs. Upon receipt of an MA, innovative medicinal products (i.e., reference products) are generally entitled to benefit from eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity, if granted, prevents generic and biosimilar applicants from relying on the preclinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar MA in the EU during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. The market exclusivity period prevents a successful generic or biosimilar applicant from commercializing its product in the EU until ten years have elapsed from the initial MA of the reference product in the EU. The overall ten-year period may, occasionally, be extended for a further year to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EU’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical/biological entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity.
In the EU, there is a special regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet the definition of a generic medicinal product. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided in support of an application for MA. Guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product.
Manufacturing Regulation in the EU
In addition to an MA, various other requirements apply to the manufacture and placing on the EU market of medicinal products. The manufacture of medicinal products in the EU requires a manufacturing authorization. Moreover, import of medicinal products into the EU requires a manufacturing authorization allowing for import. The holder of a manufacturing authorization must comply with various requirements set out in the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidance, including GMP standards. Similarly, the distribution of medicinal products within the EU is subject to compliance with applicable EU laws, regulations and guidelines, including the requirement to hold appropriate authorizations for distribution granted by the competent authorities of EU member states. MA holders and/or manufacturing and import authorization, or MA holders and/or distribution authorization holders may be subject to civil, criminal or administrative sanctions, including suspension of manufacturing authorization, in case of non-compliance with the EU or EU member states’ requirements applicable to the manufacturing of medicinal products.
Post-authorization Requirements in the EU
Where an MA is granted in relation to a medicinal product in the EU, the holder of the MA is required to comply with a range of regulatory requirements applicable to the manufacture, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. Similar to the United States, both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the individual EU member states. The holder of an MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance who is responsible for oversight of that system. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports (“PSURs”).
All new MAAs must include a risk management plan (“RMP”), describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Such risk minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies.
In the EU, the advertising and promotion of medicinal products are subject to both EU and EU member states’ laws governing promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians and other healthcare professionals, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. General requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products, such as direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicinal products are established in EU law. However, the details are governed by regulations in individual EU member states and can differ from one country to another. For example, applicable laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics (“SmPC”), which may require approval by the competent
Table of Contents
national authorities in connection with an MA. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians and other healthcare professionals concerning the safe and effective use of the product. Promotional activity that does not comply with the SmPC is considered off-label and is prohibited in the EU.
The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the European Economic Area (which is comprised of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein).
Failure to comply with EU and member state laws that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, MA of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the MA, manufacturing of pharmaceutical products, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or with other applicable regulatory requirements may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant MA, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the MA, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.
Pricing, Coverage and Reimbursement in the EU
In the EU, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some EU member states may approve a specific price for a product, or they may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Other EU member states allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions.
In addition, some EU member states may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular medicinal product candidate to currently available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”), process is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medicinal products will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU member states.
On January 12, 2025, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (the “HTA Regulation”) entered into application through a phase implementation. The Regulation initially applies to new active substances for oncology and ATMPs. It will be expanded to orphan medicinal products in January 2028, and to all centrally authorized medicinal products as of 2030. Select high-risk medical devices also came into scope in 2026. The Regulation is intended to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and establishes the framework for EU level joint clinical assessments, joint scientific consultations, and the early identification of emerging health technologies. The HTA Regulation is intended to harmonize the clinical benefit assessment of HTA across the EU. The Regulation permits EU Member States to use common tools, methodologies, and procedures and requires them to rely on EU-level joint clinical assessment reports for the clinical components of their national HTA evaluations. Individual EU Member States will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement.
UK Regulation
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) is the United Kingdom’s standalone regulator for medicinal products and medical devices.
While the UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials was historically based on the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, which implemented the former EU Clinical Trials Directive, this has been significantly reformed by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) (Amendment) Regulations 2024. The new legislation, which was adopted in April 2025, modernizes the United Kingdom's approach to make it a more attractive location for research, and includes key features such as: (i) a risk-proportionate approach, including a notification scheme for lower-risk trials; (ii) a combined review process integrating ethics committee and regulatory approvals into a single, streamlined pathway; (iii) enhanced transparency requirements mandating registration of clinical trials in a public registry and publication of trial results within 12 months of trial completion (with scope for deferrals in certain circumstances); (iv) greater flexibility
Table of Contents
to support innovation in clinical trial design; and (v) measures to promote patient and public involvement. The amendments will become applicable on April 28, 2026 following a one-year transition period.
Marketing authorizations in the UK are governed by the Human Medicines Regulations (SI 2012/1916), as amended. To obtain a UK MA to commercialize products in the UK, an applicant must be established in the UK and must follow one of the UK national authorization procedures or one of the remaining post-Brexit international cooperation procedures. Applications are governed by the Human Medicines Regulations (SI 2012/1916) and are made electronically through the MHRA Submissions Portal. The MHRA has introduced changes to national licensing procedures, including procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, a 150-day assessment (subject to clock-stops) and a rolling review procedure. The rolling-review procedure permits the separate or joint submission of quality, non-clinical, and clinical data to the MHRA which can be reviewed on a rolling basis. After an application under the rolling-review procedure has been validated, the decision should be received within 100 days (subject to clock-stops).
In addition, since January 1, 2024, the MHRA may rely on the International Recognition Procedure (“IRP”), when reviewing certain types of MAAs. Pursuant to the IRP, the MHRA will take into account the expertise and decision-making of trusted regulatory partners (e.g., the regulatory in Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Singapore, Japan, the United States and the EU). The MHRA will conduct a targeted assessment of IRP applications but retain the authority to reject applications if the evidence provided is considered insufficiently robust. The IRP allows medicinal products approved by such trusted regulatory partners that meet certain criteria to undergo a fast-tracked MHRA review to obtain and/or update a MA in the UK. Applications should be decided within a maximum of 60 days if there are no major objections identified that cannot be resolved within such 60-day period and the approval from the trusted regulatory partner selected has been granted within the previous two years or if there are such major objections identified or such approval hasn’t been granted within the previous two years within 110 days. Applicants can submit initial MAAs to the IRP, but the procedure can also be used throughout the lifecycle of a product for post-authorization procedures including line extensions, variations and renewals.
Japanese Regulation
Manufacturers and sellers of drugs, quasi-drugs, cosmetics, medical devices and regenerative medical products (“Designated Products”) in Japan are subject to the supervision of Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (“MHLW”) primarily under the Act on Securing Quality, Efficacy and Safety of Pharmaceuticals, Medical Devices, Regenerative and Cellular Therapy Products, Gene Therapy Products, and Cosmetics of Japan (“PMDA” or “PMD Act”). Under the PMD Act, the relevant licenses must be obtained from the MHLW in order to conduct the business of manufacturing, marketing or selling Designated Products.
Applications for the approval of new products are made through the PMDA. The clinical trial data and other pertinent data must be attached to the application for approval. If the drugs, medical devices or regenerative medical products under application are of types designated by ministerial ordinance of the MHLW, the attached data mentioned above must be obtained in compliance with the standards established by the minister of the MHLW (“Minister”), such as the Good Laboratory Practice and the Good Clinical Practice. Once an application for approval is submitted, a review team is formed, which consists of specialized officials of the PMDA, including experts on chemistry/manufacturing, non-clinical, clinical, and biostatistics. Team evaluation results are passed to the PMDA’s external experts, who then report back to the PMDA. After a further team evaluation, a report is provided to the Minister; the Minister makes a final determination for approval and refers this to the Council on Drugs and Foods Sanitation, which then advises the MHLW on final approvability. Marketing and distribution approvals require a review to determine whether or not the product in the application is suitable as a drug to be manufactured and distributed with which a manufacturing and distribution business license for the type of drug concerned has been obtained, and to confirm that the product has been manufactured in a plant compliant with the GMP.
Once the MHLW has approved the application, the company can make the new drug available for physicians to prescribe. After that, the MHLW lists its National Health Insurance price within 60 days (or 90 days at the latest) from the approval, and physicians can obtain reimbursement. For some medications, the MHLW requires additional post marketing studies (Phase 4) to further evaluate safety and/or to gather information concerning the quality, efficacy, and safety of the product under specified conditions, in addition to post marketing surveillance including Early Post-marketing Phase Vigilance
Table of Contents
(“EPPV”) based on the RMP for all new medications. The MHLW also requires the drug’s sponsor to submit periodic safety update reports. Within three months from the specified re-examination period, which is designated at the time of the approval of the application for the new product, the company must submit a re-examination application to enable the drug’s quality, efficacy, and safety to be reassessed against approved labeling by the PMDA.
The PMD Act also provides for special regulations applicable to drugs, quasi-drugs, cosmetics and medical devices made of biological raw materials. These regulations impose various obligations on manufacturers and other persons in relation to manufacturing facilities, explanation to patients, labeling on products, record-keeping and reporting to the Minister.
Under the PMD Act, the Minister may take various measures to supervise manufacturing and marketing license holders of Designated Products. The Minister has the authority to order manufacturing and marketing license holders to temporarily suspend the marketing, leasing or providing of the Designated Products to prevent risks or increases in risks to the public health. Also, the Minister may revoke a license or approval granted to a manufacturing and marketing license holder or order a temporary business suspension under certain limited circumstances such as violation of laws relating to drugs.
The Hatch-Waxman Amendments
Orange Book Listing
Under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch Waxman Amendments, NDA applicants are required to identify to FDA each patent whose claims cover the applicant’s drug or approved method of using the drug. Upon approval of a drug, the applicant must update its listing of patents to the NDA in timely fashion and each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book.
Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”). An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active ingredient(s), strength, route of administration and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown through bioequivalence testing to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug. An approved ANDA product is considered to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or submit results of, preclinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Drugs approved under the ANDA pathway are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug pursuant to each state’s laws on drug substitution.
The ANDA applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents identified for the reference listed drug in the Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify to each patent in one of the following ways: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. For patents listed that claim an approved method of use, under certain circumstances the ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a section viii statement certifying that its proposed ANDA label does not contain (or carves out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents through a Paragraph IV certification, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA-holder and patentee(s) once the ANDA has been received by the FDA for review (referred to as the “notice letter”). The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice letter. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months from the date the notice letter is received, expiration of the patent, the date of a settlement order or consent decree signed and entered by the court stating that the patent that is the subject of the certification is invalid or not infringed, or a decision in the patent case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant.
Table of Contents
The ANDA application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired. In some instances, an ANDA applicant may receive approval prior to expiration of certain non-patent exclusivity if the applicant seeks, and FDA permits, the omission of such exclusivity-protected information from the ANDA prescribing information.
Hatch-Waxman Exclusivity
Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications. For example, upon NDA approval of a new chemical entity (“NCE”), which is a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by FDA in any other NDA, that drug receives five years of non-patent data exclusivity during which FDA cannot receive (1) any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug or (2) an NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA (505(b)(2) NDA) by another company for another drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovative drug or for another indication. However, an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder (i.e., a Paragraph IV certification).
The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for drugs containing the active moiety for any other indication or condition of use. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct, or obtain a right of reference to, all of the nonclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.
Patent Term Extension
The Hatch Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. Patent term extension, however, cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. After NDA approval, owners of relevant drug patents may apply for the extension. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as half of the drug’s testing phase (the time between IND application and NDA submission) and all of the review phase (the time between NDA submission and approval) up to a maximum of five years. The time can be reduced for any time FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. However, the USPTO may not grant an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than requested.
The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years, and only one patent can be extended. The application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent, and for patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the USPTO must determine that approval of the drug covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for a drug for which an NDA has not been submitted.
Other U.S. Regulatory Matters
Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities following drug approval are also subject to regulation by numerous
Table of Contents
regulatory authorities in addition to the FDA, including, in the United States, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), other divisions of HHS, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and state and local governments.
The failure to comply with regulatory requirements subjects manufacturers to possible legal or regulatory action.
Data Privacy and Security Laws
Numerous state, federal and foreign laws, regulations and standards govern the collection, use, access to, confidentiality and security of health-related and other personal information. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws and consumer protection laws and regulations govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information. For example, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (“HITECH”) and their respective implementing regulations, impose privacy, security and breach notification obligations on certain health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses, known as covered entities, as well as their business associates that perform certain services that involve creating, receiving, maintaining or transmitting individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of such covered entities. Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative fines and penalties, and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations if required to enter into a resolution agreement and corrective action plan with HHS to settle allegations of HIPAA non-compliance. Further, entities that knowingly obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA may be subject to criminal penalties. In addition, certain state laws govern the privacy and security of personal information, including health-related information, in certain circumstances. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) imposes certain data privacy obligations for covered companies and provides certain privacy rights to California residents. Other states have also enacted, proposed, or are considering proposing, data privacy laws. In addition, certain foreign laws govern the privacy and security of personal information, including health-related information. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing.
Other U.S. Healthcare Laws
Pharmaceutical manufacturers are subject to numerous federal and state laws and regulations including, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims and transparency laws, such as the following:
federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibit, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce either the referral of an individual, for an item or service or the purchasing or ordering of a good or service, for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
federal false claims laws, including the False Claim Act and the Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, information or claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payers that are false or fraudulent. In addition, a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act;
HIPAA, which, in addition to the privacy, security, and breach notification obligations described above, also prohibits, among other things, executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program (including private health plans) or making false statements relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
Table of Contents
the FDCA, which among other things, strictly regulates drug product and medical device marketing, prohibits manufacturers from marketing such products prior to approval or for off-label use and regulates the distribution of samples;
federal laws that require pharmaceutical manufacturers to report certain calculated product prices to the government or provide certain discounts or rebates to government authorities or private entities, often as a condition of reimbursement under government healthcare programs;
the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to the CMS information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members; and
state law equivalents of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payer, including private insurers, state transparency laws, and state laws limiting interactions between pharmaceutical manufacturers and members of the healthcare industry, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, and often are not preempted by HIPAA.
Violations of such laws may result in significant penalties, including criminal, civil and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, diminished profits and future earnings, and the curtailment or restructuring of operations.
U.S. Healthcare Reform
The U.S. government, state legislatures, and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price-controls, restrictions on reimbursement, and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “ACA”) was passed which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Since its enactment, there have been amendments and judicial, Congressional and executive branch challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “OBBBA”) was signed into law, which narrowed access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired ACA subsidies. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.
The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct-to-consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for
Table of Contents
example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products and launching an online clearinghouse, referred to as TrumpRx, for patients to purchase certain products from manufacturers on a cash pay basis; (3) ongoing trade tensions between the United States and other jurisdictions that have resulted in multiple rounds of tariffs and potential tariffs affecting pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact “The Great Healthcare Plan,” to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could, among other things, impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.
At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access, and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.
Employees and Human Capital Resources
As of December 31, 2025, we employed 221 full-time and 3 part-time employees, consisting of clinical, scientific, development, regulatory, finance, legal and operational personnel. We also retain independent contractors to support certain organizational needs. None of our employees is subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.
We recognize that our culture is central to the productivity, agility, scalability and competitiveness of our operation, and is essential to our success. We are clear and consistent in our company values and we communicate and support an employee value proposition. Our proposition is centered with unique and impactful professional development opportunities within an environment of inclusive representation and diverse thinking as a unifying force and business differentiator. Our employees are critical to our long-term success and are essential to helping us meet our goals. Among other things, we support and incentivize our employees in the following ways:
Talent development, compensation and retention: Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and additional employees. The principal purposes of our equity incentive plans are to attract, retain and motivate selected employees, consultants and directors through the granting of stock-based compensation awards.
Health and safety: We support the health and safety of our employees by providing comprehensive insurance benefits, an employee assistance program, company-paid holidays, a personal time-off program and other additional benefits which are intended to assist employees to manage their well-being.
Inclusion and diversity workplace: We are committed to an inclusive and diverse workplace because we believe that fostering an inclusive work environment with a team of employees having wide-ranging backgrounds, experiences, perspectives and skillsets enhances our corporate culture and is key to our long-term success .
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock, you should carefully consider the risks described below, together with the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Table of Contents
Results of Operations” and in our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We cannot assure you that any of the events discussed below will not occur. These events could adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If that were to happen, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Capital
We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history and no products approved for commercial sale, and have incurred substantial losses since our inception and anticipate incurring substantial and increasing losses for the foreseeable future.
We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history on which to base your investment decision. We have no product candidates approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking. It entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval or become commercially viable.
Our most advanced candidate is envu, an oral, small molecule allosteric inhibitor of TYK2. We are currently conducting a Phase 2 open-label extension trial, as well as a Phase 3 LTE trial of envu in PsO and a Phase 2b clinical trial of envu in SLE. In addition, we are advancing A-005, an investigational CNS penetrant allosteric inhibitor of TYK2 that has a potential application in multiple sclerosis and other neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases, currently in Phase 1 clinical development. Our ability to achieve profitability in the future is dependent upon obtaining regulatory approval for and successfully commercializing our most advanced candidate, envu, either alone or with third parties. However, our operations may not be profitable even if envu is successfully developed, approved and thereafter commercialized.
We have and will continue to incur significant development and other expenses related to our research and clinical development programs and ongoing operations. For the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, our net losses were $243.3 million and $294.2 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $901.9 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with the acquisition and development of our pipeline and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our development of our product candidates.
We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if, and as, we:
conduct preclinical studies and clinical trials for envu, A-005, and potential future programs;
identify additional product candidates and acquire rights from third parties to those product candidates through licenses or other acquisitions, and conduct development activities, including preclinical studies and clinical trials;
procure the manufacturing of preclinical, clinical and commercial supply of our current and future product candidates;
seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates or any future product candidates;
commercialize our current product candidates or any future product candidates, if approved;
take steps toward our goal of being an integrated biopharma company capable of supporting commercial activities, including establishing sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure;
attract, hire and retain qualified clinical, scientific, operations and management personnel;
Table of Contents
add and maintain operational, financial and information management systems;
protect, maintain, enforce and defend our rights in our intellectual property portfolio;
defend against third-party interference, infringement and other intellectual property claims, if any;
address any competing therapies and market developments;
experience any delays in our preclinical studies or clinical trials and seeking regulatory approval for our product candidates due to public health concerns, macroeconomic conditions or geopolitical conflicts; and
incur costs associated with operating as a public company.
Even if we succeed in commercializing one or more product candidates, we expect to incur substantial development costs and other expenditures to develop and market additional product candidates. We may also encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue or raise additional capital. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and our working capital.
We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended, put on clinical hold or terminated by us, the IRBs or ethics committees of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, the FDA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or if a clinical trial is recommended for suspension or termination by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial. A suspension, clinical hold or termination may be imposed due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, failure by our contract research organizations (“CROs”) or clinical trial sites to perform in accordance with GCPs, or applicable regulatory guidelines in other countries, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. For example, we discontinued our proof-of-concept Phase 2a clinical trial of envu in patients with non-infectious uveitis in June 2024 based on the efficacy results of a data analysis prepared for a scheduled monitoring committee meeting, which efficacy results did not meet our clinical threshold for success despite safety results consistent with envu’s safety profile in psoriasis patients. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Further, the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials.
We may also, in the future, conduct preclinical and clinical research in collaboration with other academic, pharmaceutical and biotechnology entities in which we combine our research or development efforts with those of our collaborators. Such collaborations may be subject to additional delays because of the management of the trials, contract negotiations, the need to obtain agreement from multiple parties and may increase our future costs and expenses.
Our product development costs will increase if we experience delays in clinical testing or regulatory approvals. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, potentially impairing our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Any delays or increase in costs in our clinical development programs may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Enrollment and retention of participants in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside our control, including difficulties in identifying
Table of Contents
patients, the availability of competitive products and significant competition for recruiting participants in clinical trials.
Participant enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many conditions, including the size and nature of the patient population, the number and location of clinical sites we enroll, the proximity of participants to clinical sites, the eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, the inability to obtain and maintain participant consents, the risk that enrolled participants will drop out before completion, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs or biologics that may be approved for the indications being investigated by us. Risks related to patient enrollment are heightened in longer clinical trials, including the 48-week trial period contemplated by our ongoing Phase 2b clinical trial of envu in SLE. In particular, this trial has been and may continue to be challenging to enroll due to the fact that patients must be experiencing active disease at the time of screening to be eligible for enrollment. In addition, our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of participants available to us, because some participants who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors, or to use currently marketed therapies. Additionally, participants, including participants in any control groups, may withdraw from the clinical trial if they are not experiencing improvement in their underlying disease or condition or if they experience other difficulties or issues. Additionally, we could encounter delays if treating clinicians encounter unresolved ethical issues associated with enrolling participants in clinical trials of our product candidates in lieu of prescribing existing treatments that have established safety and efficacy profiles.
We have in the past experienced and expect to continue to experience participant withdrawals or discontinuations from our trials. For example, as long-term treatment with envu continues to be evaluated in our STRIDE OLE, ONWARD3 LTE study and LUMUS Part B OLE, we expect to see discontinuation rates rise over time. Withdrawal of participants from our clinical trials may compromise the quality of our data. Even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of participants in our clinical trials, delays in enrollment or small population size may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of our clinical trials. Any of these conditions may negatively impact our ability to complete such trials or include results from such trials in regulatory submissions, which could adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates.
We will require substantial additional financing to achieve our goals, and failure to obtain additional capital when needed, or on acceptable terms to us, could cause us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts.
Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through equity offerings, debt financings, or other capital sources, including potential collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. For example, in March 2026, we entered into a Controlled Equity Offering SM Sales Agreement (as amended from time to time, the “Sales Agreement”) with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. (“Cantor”), pursuant to which we may offer and sell, from time to time through Cantor, at our option, shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $300.0 million. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, including pursuant to sales under the Sales Agreement, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a holder of our common stock. Any future debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, selling or licensing our assets, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or encumbering our assets to secure future indebtedness. Such restrictions could adversely impact our ability to conduct our operations and execute our business plan. We could also be required to seek collaborators for product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available or relinquish or license on unfavorable terms our rights to product candidates in markets where we otherwise would seek to pursue development or commercialization ourselves.
Based on our current operating plan, we will need to raise additional financing to continue our products’ development for the foreseeable future, and until we become profitable, if ever. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize product candidates. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to obtain funding when and as needed on a timely basis, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue
Table of Contents
one or more of our research or development programs or the commercialization of any product candidate, or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our common stock to decline.
Risks Related to Product Candidate Development and Commercialization
Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our current product candidates or any future product candidates.
Our product candidates are either in clinical or preclinical development, and their risk of failure is high. It is impossible to predict when or if our product candidates will receive regulatory approval. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and lengthy, complex and expensive clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans for their intended uses. Before obtaining approval from regulatory authorities for the commercialization of any of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidate in humans. Before we can initiate clinical trials for any product candidates, we must submit the results of preclinical studies to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities along with other information, including information about product candidate chemistry, manufacturing and controls and our proposed clinical trial protocol, as part of an IND application or similar regulatory submission. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to conduct additional preclinical studies for any product candidate before allowing us to initiate clinical trials under any IND or similar regulatory submission, which may lead to delays and increase the costs of our preclinical development programs.
Once initiated, clinical testing can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials and results in one indication may not be predictive of results to be expected for the same product candidate in another indication. For example, while we plan to continue to evaluate the development program for lonigutamab, which was ACELYRIN’s lead product candidate, and its potential differentiation in a capital efficient manner, lonigutamab’s potential to improve on the safety and side-effect profile of the sole currently-approved therapy in the United States for the treatment of TED is unproven. In particular, if lonigutamab is shown to have similar adverse events or side effects as the existing therapy, or other safety or tolerability concerns, such as hearing impairment, then our opportunity to disrupt the current standard of care in TED will be limited or precluded altogether. In this regard, ACELYRIN observed certain adverse events in its Phase 2 clinical trial of lonigutamab including, without limitation, headache, tinnitus and injection site reactions. If we determine that, whether due to emerging clinical data or otherwise, any of our drug candidates will be unable to improve on the current standard of care in the indications we are pursuing, we may decide to modify, suspend or abandon such development program. Differences in trial design between early-stage clinical trials and later-stage clinical trials make it difficult to extrapolate the results of earlier clinical trials to later clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or unfavorable safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials, and we have experienced and may experience setbacks in our programs in the future. For example, we discontinued our proof-of-concept Phase 2a clinical trial of envu in patients with non-infectious uveitis in June 2024 based on the efficacy results of a data analysis prepared for a scheduled monitoring committee meeting, which efficacy results did not meet our clinical threshold for success despite safety results consistent with envu’s safety profile in psoriasis patients. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory approval of such product candidates.
Commencing any future clinical trials is subject to finalizing the trial design and submitting an application to the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority. Even after we make our submission, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could disagree that we have satisfied their requirements to commence our clinical trials or disagree with our study design, which may require us to complete additional trials or amend our protocols or impose stricter conditions on the commencement of clinical trials. There is typically a high rate of failure of product candidates proceeding through clinical trials, and failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Most product candidates that commence
Table of Contents
clinical trials are never approved as products and there can be no assurance that any of our current or future clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support the approval of our current or any future product candidates.
We expect to continue to rely on our CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials, including the participant enrollment process, and we have limited influence over their performance. We or any future collaborators may experience delays in initiating or completing clinical trials due to unforeseen events or otherwise, that could delay or prevent our ability to receive regulatory approval or commercialize our current and any future product candidates, including:
we may be unable to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology, or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation or continuation of clinical trials;
regulators, such as the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;
regulators, such as the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, IRBs, or ethics committees may impose additional requirements before permitting us to initiate a clinical trial, may not allow us or our investigators to commence or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site, may not allow us to amend trial protocols, or may require that we modify or amend our clinical trial protocols;
we may experience delays in reaching, or fail to reach, agreement on acceptable terms with trial sites and CROs, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly;
we may be unable to identify, recruit, or train suitable clinical investigators;
clinical trial sites may deviate from trial protocol or drop out of a trial;
we may be unable to complete our clinical trials due to trial participant withdrawals and discontinuations due to AEs;
the number of participants required for clinical trials may be larger than we anticipate, enrollment in clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or participants may drop out or fail to return for post-treatment follow-up at a higher rate than we anticipate;
the cost of clinical trials may be greater than we anticipate, or we may have insufficient funds to initiate or complete a clinical trial or to pay the substantial user fees required by the FDA upon the submission of an NDA or comparable marketing authorization application in another jurisdiction;
the quality or quantity of data relating to our product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct our clinical trials may be inadequate to initiate or complete a given clinical trial;
reports from clinical testing of other therapies may raise safety, tolerability or efficacy concerns about our product candidates;
clinical trials of our product candidates may fail to show appropriate safety, tolerability or efficacy, may produce negative or inconclusive results, or may otherwise fail to improve on the existing standard of care, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or we may decide to abandon product development programs;
our CROs or clinical trial sites may fail to perform in accordance with GCP requirements or other applicable regulations, rules or guidelines;
we may be unable to manufacture our product candidates from our contract manufacturing organizations
Table of Contents
(“CMOs”) in accordance with cGMP regulations or other applicable requirements in sufficient quantities for use in our clinical trials;
SAEs may occur in trials of the same class of agents conducted by other companies that could be considered similar to our product candidates;
we may select clinical endpoints that require prolonged periods of clinical observation or extended analysis of the resulting data;
we may be required to transfer our manufacturing processes to larger-scale facilities operated by a different CMO, or may experience delays or failure by our CMOs or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process; and
third parties may be unwilling or unable to satisfy their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner.
In addition, we have historically leveraged our extensive analyses of immune-relevant GWAS results from both the public domain and the UK Biobank biomedical resource to identify the right therapeutic target on which to focus our preclinical and clinical development efforts. If our access to GWAS results from the public domain or the UK Biobank biomedical resource were to be restricted, including as a result of any potential future legislative policies or regulations that may seek to restrict the sharing of genetic data, our ability to efficiently identify additional therapeutic targets may be limited.
In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. In the EU, the EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) became applicable on January 31, 2022, repealing and replacing the Clinical Trials Directive (“CTD”). The CTR permits trial sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each EU member state, leading to a single decision for each EU member state. The assessment procedure for the authorization of clinical trials has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment of some elements of the application by all EU member states in which the trial is to be conducted, and a separate assessment by each EU member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each EU member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor through a centralized EU portal, the Clinical Trial Information System. The CTR foresaw a three-year transition period that ended on January 31, 2025. Since this date, all new or ongoing trials are subject to the provisions of the CTR.
Moreover, following a public consultation that began in 2022, the United Kingdom government has enacted new legislation to overhaul the clinical trials regulatory framework. In April 2025, the UK adopted an amendment to the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004 intended to support a more streamlined and flexible regulation of clinical trials, remove unnecessary administrative burdens on trial sponsors, and protect the interests of trial participants. It also intends to bring the UK regulatory framework for clinical trials into closer alignment with the CTR. The amendment will become applicable on April 28, 2026 following a one-year transition period. While these changes introduce efficiencies and align with some principles of the EU’s CTR, divergence between the United Kingdom and EU regulatory systems remains. Any significant divergence could affect the cost and complexity of conducting clinical trials in the United Kingdom and may impact the acceptability of United Kingdom-based trial data for seeking marketing authorizations in the EU, and vice versa.
Our clinical trials may reveal SAEs and AEs and may result in a safety or tolerability profile that could delay or prevent regulatory approval or market acceptance of envu, A-005 or any future product candidates.
Undesirable or clinically unmanageable side effects observed in our clinical trials for our product candidates could occur and cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt our clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive labeling or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.
We have observed SAEs and AEs in our trials of envu, and as more patients become exposed to envu over longer periods of time, we expect to see additional SAEs and AEs emerge. Further, long term treatment with envu continues to be evaluated in an OLE trial, and additional AEs and SAEs will continue to accumulate. Certain conditions occur more
Table of Contents
frequently in patients with psoriasis compared to the general population. Examples include obesity, cardiovascular disease, psoriatic arthritis and depression. Immune modulating treatments including envu may result in increasing susceptibility to various infections, including serious or life-threatening infections, and there is a theoretical risk with immune-modulating agents that dampening immune responses could increase the risk of malignancies.
Other TYK2 inhibitors, such as deucravacitinib (marketed as Sotyktu), which is approved for the treatment of adults with PsO, have shown AEs such as hypersensitivity reactions, infections, tuberculosis, malignancy and rhabdomyolysis. The label for deucravacitinib includes a warning concerning the potential for JAK-related AEs, such as cardiovascular and thrombotic events. We have observed, and expect that additional AEs and SAEs consistent with known side effects of TYK2 inhibition may emerge, in our ongoing and future clinical trials of envu.
The most common AEs observed in our Phase 2 STRIDE and OLE PsO trials that were considered related to envu treatment by the principal investigator include headaches, upper respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis, rash and nausea. We continue to evaluate the safety profile of envu in our ongoing Phase 2 OLE and Phase 3 trials .
If AEs, SAEs or other side effects are observed in any of our ongoing or future clinical trials that are atypical of, or more severe than, the known side effects of the respective class of agents that each of our product candidates are a part of, we may have difficulty recruiting participants to our clinical trials, participants may drop out of our trials, or we may be required to abandon those trials or our development efforts of one or more product candidates altogether. If such effects are more severe or less reversible than we expect, or not reversible at all, we may decide or be required to perform additional studies or to halt or delay further clinical development of envu, A-005 or any future product candidates, which could result in the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.
If envu fails to demonstrate an acceptable benefit/risk profile, versus current approved therapies or others in clinical development, then our opportunity to disrupt the current standard of care may be limited. AEs and SAEs that emerge during clinical investigation of or treatment with envu, A-005, or any future product candidates have in the past been and may in the future be deemed to be related to our product candidates. This may require longer and more extensive clinical development, or regulatory authorities may increase the amount of data and information required to approve, market, or maintain envu, A-005 or any future product candidates and could result in warnings and precautions in our product labeling or a restrictive REMS or comparable foreign strategies. This may also result in an inability to obtain approval of envu, A-005 or any future product candidates. We, the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or an IRB or ethics committee, may suspend clinical trials of a product candidate at any time for various reasons, including a belief that participants in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Some potential product candidates developed in the biotechnology industry that initially showed promise in early-stage trials have later been found to cause side effects that prevented their further development. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval, undesirable side effects, like those mentioned above, may limit market acceptance of the approved product due to its tolerability versus other therapies. Any of these developments could materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives regulatory approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result. For example, the FDA could require us to adopt a REMS, to ensure that the benefits of treatment with such product candidate outweigh the risks for each potential patient, which may include, among other things, a communication plan to health care practitioners, patient education, extensive patient monitoring or distribution systems and processes that are highly controlled, restrictive and more costly than what is typical for the industry. We or our collaborators may also be required to adopt a REMS or comparable foreign strategies or engage in similar actions, such as patient education, certification of health care professionals or specific monitoring, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any product that we develop alone or with collaborators. Other potentially significant negative consequences associated with AEs include:
we may be required to suspend marketing of a product, or we may decide to remove such product from the marketplace;
regulatory authorities may withdraw, suspend or change their approvals of a product;
Table of Contents
regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label or limit access of a product to selective specialized centers with additional safety reporting and with requirements that patients be geographically close to these centers for all or part of their treatment; and
we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of a product for patients, or to conduct post-marketing studies.
Any of these events could diminish the usage or otherwise limit the commercial success of our product candidates and prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.
Preliminary, “top-line” and interim data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available or are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.
From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or top-line data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which are based on preliminary analyses of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular preclinical study or clinical trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the top-line or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies or trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Top-line and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, top-line and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.
From time to time, we may also disclose data from interim analyses from our clinical trials. Interim analyses from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as participants enrollment continues and more participant data become available or as participants from our clinical trials continue other treatments for their disease. Adverse differences between interim data, topline data, or preliminary data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.
Further, others, including regulatory authorities, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate and could adversely affect the success of our business. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure.
If the interim, top-line or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Further, disclosure of interim, top-line or preliminary data by us or by our competitors could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.
We have conducted, are currently conducting, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials for current or future product candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.
We have conducted, are currently conducting, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials outside the United States, including (without limitation) in the EU, the UK, Japan, Latin America and APAC countries. We expect to continue to conduct trials internationally in the future. The acceptance of data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for
Table of Contents
regulatory approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice and (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for regulatory approval unless the study is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar requirements for clinical data gathered outside of their respective jurisdictions. In addition, such foreign trials are subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in current or future product candidates that we may develop being delayed or not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.
Even if we receive regulatory approval for our current or future product candidates in the United States, we may never receive regulatory approval to market outside of the United States.
We plan to seek regulatory approval for our current and future product candidates outside of the United States and are currently conducting certain clinical trials internationally, including in the EU and Japan. In order to market any product outside of the United States, however, we must establish and comply with the numerous and varying safety, efficacy and other regulatory requirements of other applicable countries. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product candidate testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approvals in other countries might differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The regulatory approval processes in other countries generally implicate all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the United States as well as other risks. In particular, in many countries outside of the United States, products must receive pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be commercialized. Obtaining this approval can result in substantial delays in bringing products to market in such countries. Regulatory approval in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others and would impair our ability to market our current or future product candidates in such foreign markets. Any such impairment would reduce the size of our potential market, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
The successful commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health payors and insurers establish coverage, adequate reimbursement levels and favorable pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our product candidates could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.
The availability of coverage and the adequacy of reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford prescription medications such as our product candidates, if approved. Our ability to achieve coverage and acceptable levels of reimbursement for our products by third-party payors will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize those products. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement in the United States, the EU, Japan or elsewhere will be available for any product that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future.
Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for biopharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs when equivalent generic drugs, biosimilars or less expensive therapies are available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our product candidates, if approved, as substitutable and only be willing to cover the cost of the alternative product. Even if we show improved efficacy, safety or improved convenience of administration with envu, A-005 or any of our future product candidates, if approved, pricing of competitive products may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our product
Table of Contents
candidates, if approved. Third-party payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in our product candidates. In some cases, when new competitor generic and biosimilar products enter the market, there are mandatory price reductions for the innovator compound. In other cases, payors employ “therapeutic category” price referencing and seek to lower the reimbursement levels for all treatments in the respective therapeutic category. Additionally, new competitor brand drugs can trigger therapeutic category reviews in the interest of modifying coverage and/or reimbursement levels. The potential of third-party payors to introduce more challenging price negotiation methodologies could have a negative impact on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved.
There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs will be covered. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our products, if approved.
Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time consuming, costly and uncertain. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs. However, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases on short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely.
Outside the United States, biopharmaceutical products and services are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe and other countries will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Some countries provide that products may be marketed only after an agreement on reimbursement price has been reached. Such pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of marketing approval for a product. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Other countries allow companies to establish their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits or control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. In addition, some EU member states may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular medicinal product candidate to currently available therapies. This HTA process is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medicinal products will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU member states.
Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates, if approved. In December 2021, the HTA Regulation was adopted. The HTA Regulation intends to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and provide the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. The HTA Regulation entered into application on January 12, 2025 and has a phased implementation. Individual EU member states continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement.
Further, the containment of health care costs also has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments and the prices of products have been a focus in this effort. For example, the HHS imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been
Table of Contents
empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least seven years and biologics that have been on the market for at least 11 years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to 20 products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. Such increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. There can be no assurance that any country that has reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products, if approved in those countries. In the event Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products is implemented and applicable to any of product candidates that may receive regulatory approval, our revenue opportunities may be adversely affected, as our U.S. pricing would have to be reduced to the lowest price paid for the applicable product outside of the United States. In such event, we may choose to forgo the ex-U.S. market to preserve more favorable U.S. pricing.
We face competition from entities that have made substantial investments into the rapid development of competitor treatments for immunological indications, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, many of which already have approved therapies in our current indications.
The development and commercialization of therapies is highly competitive. Our product candidates, if approved, will face significant competition, including from well-established, currently marketed therapies, and our failure to demonstrate a meaningful improvement to the existing standard of care may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration. Many of our competitors have significantly greater resources and experience than we do, and we may not be able to successfully compete. We face substantial competition from multiple sources, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Our competitors compete with us on the level of the technologies employed, or on the level of development of their products as compared to our product candidates. In addition, many small biotechnology companies have formed collaborations with large, established companies to (i) obtain support for their research, development and commercialization of products or (ii) combine several treatment approaches to develop longer lasting or more efficacious treatments that may potentially directly compete with our current or any future product candidates. We anticipate that we will continue to face increasing competition as new therapies and combinations thereof, and related data, emerge.
Our current product candidates initially under development for treatment of patients with immune-mediated diseases, if approved, would face competition from existing approved immunological treatments, many of which have achieved commercial success. For example, we are currently developing envu for the treatment of PsO and SLE. Other emerging and established life sciences companies have been focused on similar therapeutics and indications. If approved, envu would compete with several currently approved or late-stage oral clinical therapeutics in each such indication as well as other drugs used to treat such patients.
We are also developing A-005, which has potential applications in MS and other neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases. There are several therapies available for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS, including interferon beta regulators, monoclonal antibodies, synthetic immunomodulatory drugs and S1P receptor modulators.
To compete successfully, we need to disrupt these currently marketed drugs, meaning that we will have to demonstrate that the relative cost, method of administration, safety, tolerability and efficacy of our product candidates provide a better alternative to existing and new therapies. Our commercial opportunity and likelihood of success will be reduced or eliminated if our product candidates are not ultimately demonstrated to be safer, more effective, more conveniently administered, or less expensive than the current standard of care. Furthermore, even if our product candidates are able to achieve these attributes, acceptance of our products may be inhibited by the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing therapies to our products, or if physicians choose to reserve our products for use in limited circumstances.
Table of Contents
Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, sales and supply resources or experience than we have. If we obtain regulatory approval for any product candidate, we will face competition based on many different factors, including the safety and effectiveness of our current or any future product candidates, the ease with which our current or any future product candidates can be administered and the extent to which participants accept relatively new routes of administration, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals for these product candidates, the availability and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, price, reimbursement coverage and patent position. Competing products could present superior treatment alternatives, including by being more effective, safer, less expensive or marketed and sold more effectively than any products we may develop. Competitive products may make any products we develop obsolete or noncompetitive before we recover the expense of developing and commercializing our current or any future product candidates. Such competitors could also recruit our employees, which could negatively impact our level of expertise and our ability to execute our business plan.
Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified management and other personnel in establishing clinical trial sites and enrolling patients in clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.
Risks Related to Our Business and Operations
We are subject to various risks related to the acquisition of ACELYRIN.
We completed the acquisition of ACELYRIN on May 21, 2025. Risks, contingencies and other uncertainties that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations following the acquisition, and any anticipated benefits of the acquisition, include:
the effect of the ACELYRIN Merger on our ability to attract, motivate, retain and hire key personnel and maintain our relationships with suppliers, collaboration partners and others with whom we do business, or on our respective operating results and business generally;
the diversion of our management’s attention from our ongoing business operations;
the risk that the anticipated benefits of the ACELYRIN Merger may otherwise not be fully realized; and
risks that costs and charges and other liabilities may be greater than anticipated or incurred in different periods than anticipated.
Our business is highly dependent on the success of our most advanced product candidate, envu, and we cannot guarantee that envu will successfully complete development, receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized. If we are unable to develop, receive regulatory approval for, and ultimately successfully commercialize our product candidates, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.
We currently have no products approved for commercial sale or for which regulatory approval to market has been sought. We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the development of our most advanced product candidate, envu, which is still in clinical development, and expect that we will continue to invest heavily in envu, as well as our second product candidate, A-005, and any future product candidates we may develop. Additionally, we are evaluating the development program for lonigutamab, ACELYRIN’s lead product candidate, and its potential differentiation in a capital efficient manner. Our business and our ability to generate revenue, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, are substantially dependent on our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize our product candidates, which may never occur.
Our product candidates will require substantial additional preclinical and clinical development time, regulatory approval, commercial manufacturing arrangements, establishment of a commercial organization, significant marketing efforts, and
Table of Contents
further investment before we can generate any revenue from product sales. We currently generate no revenue, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize any products. We cannot assure you that we will meet our timelines for our current or future clinical trials, which may be delayed or not completed for a number of reasons, including the negative impacts of geopolitical instability, public health crises, labor shortages, inflation or other macroeconomic factors impacting our third-party CROs, CMOs, clinical trial sites, investigators or us. Our product candidates are susceptible to the risks of failure inherent at any stage of product development, including the appearance of unexpected AEs or failure to achieve primary endpoints in clinical trials. For example, we discontinued our proof-of-concept Phase 2a clinical trial of envu in patients with non-infectious uveitis in June 2024 based on the efficacy results of a data analysis prepared for a scheduled monitoring committee meeting, which efficacy results did not meet our clinical threshold for success despite safety results consistent with envu’s safety profile in psoriasis patients. Additionally, we may in the future advance envu, A-005 or future product candidates into clinical trials and terminate such trials prior to their completion.
Even if our product candidates are successful in clinical trials, we are not permitted to market or promote our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive sufficient regulatory approval that will allow us to successfully commercialize any product candidates. If we do not receive FDA or comparable foreign regulatory approval with the necessary conditions to allow commercialization, we will not be able to generate revenue from those product candidates in the United States or elsewhere in the foreseeable future, or at all. Any significant delays in obtaining approval for and commercializing our product candidates could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We have not previously submitted an NDA or similar marketing application to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for any product candidate, and we cannot be certain that our current or any future product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Although we plan to submit an NDA for envu for PsO in the second half of 2026, we will need to meet with the FDA and they may raise concerns or requirements that delay submission beyond our anticipated timeline. The FDA may also consider its approvals of competing products, which may alter the treatment landscape concurrently with their review of any NDA we may submit, and which may lead to changes in the FDA’s review requirements that have been previously communicated to us and our interpretation thereof, including changes to requirements for clinical data or clinical study design. Such changes could delay approval or necessitate withdrawal of any such NDA submission. Similar risks may exist in foreign jurisdictions.
If approved for marketing by applicable regulatory authorities, our ability to generate revenue from our product candidates will depend on our ability to:
price our products competitively such that third-party and government reimbursement permits broad product adoption;
demonstrate the superiority of our products compared to the standard of care, as well as to other therapies in development;
create market demand for our product candidates through our own marketing and sales activities, and any other arrangements to promote these product candidates that we may otherwise establish;
receive regulatory approval for the targeted patient populations and claims that are necessary or desirable for successful marketing;
effectively commercialize any of our products that receive regulatory approval;
manufacture product candidates through CMOs in sufficient quantities and at acceptable quality and manufacturing cost to meet commercial demand at launch and thereafter;
establish and maintain agreements with wholesalers, distributors, pharmacies, and group purchasing organizations on commercially reasonable terms;
Table of Contents
obtain, maintain, protect and enforce patent and other intellectual property protection and regulatory exclusivity for our products;
achieve market acceptance of our products by patients, the medical community, and third-party payors;
maintain a distribution and logistics network capable of product storage within our specifications and regulatory guidelines, and further capable of timely product delivery to commercial clinical sites; and
assure that our product will be used as directed and that additional unexpected safety risks will not arise.
The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.
The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing and distribution of our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities in foreign markets. In the United States, we are not permitted to market our product candidates until we receive regulatory approval of an NDA or BLA from the FDA. Similar approvals are required in order to market product candidates in foreign countries. The process of obtaining such regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications and patient population. Approval policies or regulations may change, and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons.
Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States or abroad, we must demonstrate based on adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Clinical testing is expensive, time consuming and subject to uncertainty. We cannot guarantee that any current or future clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, or that our product candidates will receive regulatory approval. Even though our topline data readout of our Phase 3 pivotal trials of envu in PsO were positive, they may not be sufficient for approval of envu in that disease, and our Phase 3 LTE trial in PsO remains ongoing. Although we have discussed and intend to further discuss our Phase 3 clinical trial design and overall development plan with the FDA to align on its sufficiency to support an NDA submission, the feedback is typically non-binding and dependent on the strength of the ultimate clinical data and the FDA’s perspective on the benefit-risk profile of the treatment in the intended population. For example, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in the EU provided comments on the length of our two pivotal 24-week Phase 3 trials, and we plan to address their feedback with our comparator trials. These modifications could delay our development timelines for EU regulatory approval and require substantially more resources. Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve hundreds of patients, have significant costs and take years to complete. In addition, we have initiated a Phase 2b trial of envu in SLE. Even as these trials progress, issues may arise that could require us to suspend or terminate such clinical trials or could cause the results of one cohort to differ from a prior cohort. For example, we may experience slower than anticipated enrollment in our clinical trials, which may consequently delay our development timelines or permit competitors to obtain approvals that may alter our strategy. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our future clinical trials may not be successful.
In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. To the extent that the results of the clinical trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional clinical trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates.
In addition, if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities grant approval for our product candidates, then, as a condition for approval, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform costly post-
Table of Contents
marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials or surveillance to monitor the effects of the marketed product.
Our clinical trial results may also not support approval. In addition, our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;
we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that our product candidates are safe and effective for any of their proposed indications;
the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval, including due to the heterogeneity of patient populations, or apparent improvement in trial participants receiving placebo;
we may be unable to demonstrate that our product candidates’ clinical and other benefits outweigh their safety risks;
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;
The data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to support the submission of an NDA or other comparable submission in foreign jurisdictions or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere;
such authorities may disagree with us regarding the formulation, labeling and/or the product specifications of our product candidates;
approval may be granted only for indications that are significantly more limited than those sought by us, and/or may include significant restrictions on distribution and use;
the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will review CMOs’ manufacturing process and inspect our CMOs’ commercial manufacturing facilities and may not approve our CMOs’ manufacturing process or facilities with respect to our product candidates; and
the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.
Even if we eventually complete clinical trials and receive approval of an NDA or comparable foreign marketing application for our product candidates, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials and/or the implementation of a REMS or comparable foreign strategies, which may be required because the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority believes it is necessary to ensure safe use of the product after approval. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval would delay or prevent commercialization of that product candidate and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.
In addition, FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may change their policies and new regulations may be enacted. For instance, on December 11, 2025, the European Commission, the Parliament and the European Council reached a political agreement on a comprehensive overhaul of EU pharmaceutical legislation (the “Pharma Package”). The reform has been under negotiation since the European Commission submitted its proposal in April 2023. This package—comprised of a new directive and regulation to replace existing legislation—aims to modernize the EU framework. The political agreement is still subject to formal approval by the European Parliament and Council. If approved in the form proposed, the Pharma Package will, among other changes, reduce the baseline market protection period by one year, with limited opportunities for extensions; reshape the incentives regime for orphan medicinal products; and expand the Bolar
Table of Contents
exemption. A decrease in market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the EU, combined with the expanded Bolar exemption, could open them to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than under the current regime, potentially impacting reimbursement status and the commercial prospects of our product candidates.
Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities caused by funding shortages, government shutdowns or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, prevent new or modified products from being developed, reviewed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.
The ability of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, government shutdowns, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies or comparable foreign authorities may also slow the time necessary for new drugs or modifications to approved drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies or regulatory authorities, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory authorities, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.
Separately, in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. Even though the FDA has since resumed standard inspection operations, any resurgence of the virus or emergence of new variants may lead to inspectional or administrative delays. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, such as the U.S. government shutdown in the fourth quarter of 2025, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
If our product candidates, if approved, do not achieve broad market acceptance, the revenue that we generate from their sales will be limited.
We have never commercialized a product candidate for any indication. Even if our product candidates are approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities for marketing and sale, they may not gain acceptance among physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. If any product candidate for which we obtain regulatory approval does not gain an adequate level of market acceptance, we may not generate sufficient product revenue or become profitable.
The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:
the safety, efficacy, tolerability and ease of administration of our product candidates;
the clinical indications for which the products are approved and the approved claims that we may make for the products;
limitations or warnings contained in the product’s approved labeling, including potential limitations on the use of the product or warnings for such products that may be more restrictive than other competitive products;
distribution and use restrictions imposed by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities with respect to such product candidates or to which we agree as part of a mandatory REMS or risk management plan;
changes in the standard of care for the targeted indications for such product candidates;
Table of Contents
the relative difficulty of administration or compliance with administration instructions of such product candidates;
cost of treatment as compared to the clinical benefit in relation to alternative treatments or therapies;
the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement by third parties, such as insurance companies and other healthcare payors, and by government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid or comparable foreign programs;
the extent and strength of our marketing and distribution of such product candidates;
the safety, efficacy and other potential advantages of, and availability of, alternative treatments already used or that may later be approved for any of our intended indications;
the timing of market introduction of such product candidates, as well as competitive products;
the reluctance of physicians to switch their patients’ current standard of care;
the reluctance of patients to switch from their existing therapy regardless of the safety and efficacy of newer products;
our ability to offer such product candidates for sale at competitive prices;
the extent and strength of our third-party manufacturer and supplier support;
adverse publicity about our product or favorable publicity about competitive products; and
potential product liability claims.
Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors as to the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful. Even if the medical community accepts that our product candidates are safe and effective for their approved indications, physicians and patients may not immediately be receptive to such product candidates and may be slow to adopt them as an accepted treatment of the approved indications. If our current or future product candidates are approved, but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance among physicians, patients, and third-party payors, we may not generate meaningful revenue from our product candidates and may never become profitable.
We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate in specific indications and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.
Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus our development efforts on certain selected product candidates in certain selected indications. For example, we are initially focused on our most advanced product candidate, envu, currently in development for the treatment of PsO and SLE, and our second product candidate, A-005, currently in development for the treatment of neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates, or other indications for our existing product candidates that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. For example, we discontinued our proof-of-concept Phase 2a clinical trial of envu in patients with non-infectious uveitis in June 2024 based on the efficacy results of a data analysis prepared for a scheduled monitoring committee meeting, which efficacy results did not meet our clinical threshold for success despite safety results consistent with envu’s safety profile in psoriasis patients. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in
Table of Contents
cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.
We will need to grow our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing our growth and expanding our operations, which could adversely affect our business.
As of December 31, 2025, we employed 221 full-time and 3 part-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we expect to expand our employee base for managerial, operational, financial and other resources.
In addition, we have limited experience in manufacturing and commercialization. As our product candidates enter and advance through preclinical studies and clinical trials, we expect to continue to expand our development and regulatory capabilities and contract with other organizations to provide manufacturing and other capabilities for us. In the future, we expect to have to manage additional relationships with future collaborators or partners, suppliers and other organizations. Our ability to manage our operations and future growth will require us to continue to improve our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures. We may not be able to implement improvements to our management information and control systems in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls. Our inability to successfully manage our growth and expand our operations could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We are dependent on the services of our management team and other clinical and scientific personnel, and if we are not able to retain these individuals or recruit additional management or clinical and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.
Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management, clinical and scientific personnel. We are highly dependent upon the members of our senior management team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, initiation or completion of our preclinical studies and clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates. Although we have executed employment agreements or offer letters with each member of our senior management team, these agreements are terminable at will with or without notice and, therefore, we may not be able to retain their services as expected. We do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of these individuals.
We will need to continue to expand and effectively manage our managerial, operational, financial and other resources in order to successfully pursue our clinical development and commercialization efforts. We may not be successful in maintaining our unique company culture and continuing to attract or retain qualified management and scientific and clinical personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among biopharmaceutical, biotechnology and other businesses, particularly in the greater San Francisco Bay Area. If we are not able to attract, integrate, retain and motivate necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will significantly impede the achievement of our development objectives, our ability to raise additional capital and our ability to implement our business strategy.
Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.
We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other illegal activity by our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners, CROs, CMOs and other parties. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct that fails to comply with FDA or other regulations, provide true, complete and accurate information to the FDA and other similar foreign regulatory bodies, respect our confidentiality and intellectual property rights, comply with manufacturing standards we may establish, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. If we obtain FDA approval for our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our potential exposure under these laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with these laws are likely to increase. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and
Table of Contents
regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Similar requirements apply in foreign countries. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, exclusion from participation in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid or comparable foreign programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, or reputational harm.
International trade policies, including tariffs, sanctions and trade barriers may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.
We conduct business globally and our operations, including third-party suppliers, span numerous countries outside the United States. There is inherent risk, based on the complex relationships among the United States and the countries in which we conduct our business, that political, diplomatic, and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. The current international trade and regulatory environment is subject to significant ongoing uncertainty. The ongoing trade tensions between the United States and other jurisdictions have resulted in multiple rounds of tariffs and potential tariffs affecting pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, manufacturing equipment and related supplies. In April 2025, the U.S. government imposed a 10% baseline global tariff and in August 2025, the U.S. government imposed higher “reciprocal” tariffs on numerous other territories, including EU member states and South Korea. While the U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a ruling invalidating tariffs imposed by the Trump administration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, other tariffs imposed by the U.S. government remain in place, including the 10% global tariff imposed by the Trump administration under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 following the U.S. Supreme Court decision. Moreover, the Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, has initiated an investigation to determine whether pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug product, manufactured outside the United States pose a national security risk and should be subject to additional tariffs.
We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for clinical testing, as well as for manufacture of any products that we may commercialize, if approved. Currently, most of our suppliers are located outside of the United States, and our principal suppliers of critical raw materials are located in India and in Taiwan. We also rely on precursor compounds, other materials, and manufacturing services sourced from multiple countries, including the European Union and South Korea, to advance our research and development and manufacturing efforts.
Current or future tariffs will result in increased research and development expenses, including with respect to increased costs associated with APIs, raw materials, laboratory equipment and research materials and components. In addition, such tariffs will increase our supply chain complexity and could also potentially disrupt our existing supply chain. Unlike consumer goods, pharmaceuticals face unique regulatory constraints that make rapid supply chain adjustments particularly difficult and costly. Trade restrictions affecting the import of materials necessary for clinical trials could result in delays to our development timelines. Increased development costs and extended development timelines could place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to companies operating in regions with more favorable trade relationships and could reduce investor confidence, negatively impacting our ability to secure additional financing on favorable terms or at all. In addition, as we advance toward commercialization, tariffs and trade restrictions could hinder our ability to establish cost-effective production capabilities, negatively impacting our growth prospects.
The complexity of announced or future tariffs may also increase the risk that we or our customers or suppliers may be
Table of Contents
subject to civil or criminal enforcement actions in the U.S. or foreign jurisdictions related to compliance with trade regulations. Foreign governments may also adopt non-tariff measures, such as procurement preferences or informal disincentives to engage with, purchase from or invest in U.S. entities, which may limit our ability to compete internationally and attract non-U.S. investment, employees, customers and suppliers. Foreign governments may also take other retaliatory actions against U.S. entities, such as decreased intellectual property protection, increased enforcement actions, or delays in regulatory approvals, which may result in heightened international legal and operational risks. In addition, the U.S. and other governments have imposed and may continue to impose additional sanctions, such as trade restrictions or trade barriers, which could restrict us from doing business directly or indirectly in or with certain countries or parties and have imposed and may continue to impose additional costs and complexity to our business.
Trade disputes, tariffs, restrictions and other political tensions between the U.S. and other countries may also exacerbate unfavorable macroeconomic conditions including inflationary pressures, foreign exchange volatility, financial market instability, and economic recessions or downturns. The ultimate impact of current or future tariffs and trade restrictions remains uncertain and could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and prospects. While we actively monitor these risks, any prolonged economic downturn, escalation in trade tensions, or deterioration in international perception of U.S.-based companies could materially and adversely affect our business, ability to access the capital markets or other financing sources, results of operations, financial condition and growth prospects. In addition, tariff and other trade developments have and may continue to heighten the risks related to the other risk factors described elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to operate in foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties.
Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets, including in the EU, the UK and Japan, for which we may rely on collaboration with third parties. We are not permitted to market or promote our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the applicable regulatory authority in that foreign market and may never receive such regulatory approval for our product candidates. To obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and receive applicable regulatory approvals, our target market will be reduced, our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed and our business will be adversely affected. We may not obtain foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Our failure to obtain approval for our product candidates by regulatory authorities in another country may significantly diminish the commercial prospects of that product candidate and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be adversely affected. Moreover, even if we obtain approval of our product candidates and ultimately commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets, we would be subject to these risks and uncertainties, including the burden of complying with complex and changing foreign regulatory, tax, accounting and legal requirements and reduced protection of intellectual property rights in some foreign countries.
Our business entails a significant risk of product liability and our ability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
As we conduct clinical trials of our current or future product candidates, we are exposed to significant product liability risks inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of new treatments. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our development programs. If we succeed in marketing products, such claims could result in FDA or other regulatory authority investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our future product candidates, our manufacturing processes and facilities or our marketing programs and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used or suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our product candidates, termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs, withdrawal of clinical trial participants, injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention, significant costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management’s time and our resources from our business operations, substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients, loss of revenue, the inability to commercialize and products that we may develop, and a
Table of Contents
decline in our stock price. We may need to obtain higher levels of product liability insurance for later stages of clinical development or marketing of our product candidates. Any insurance we may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Our insurance policies are expensive and only protect us from some business risks, which will leave us exposed to significant uninsured liabilities.
We do not carry insurance for all categories of risk that our business may encounter. Some of the policies we currently maintain include commercial general liability, general liability, cyber liability, workers’ compensation, clinical trials and directors’ and officers’ liability insurance. We do not know, however, if we will be able to maintain insurance with adequate levels of coverage. Any significant uninsured liability may require us to pay substantial amounts, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We have engaged in, and may in the future engage in, strategic transactions, which could impact our liquidity, increase our expenses, dilute our stockholders and present significant distractions to our management.
We have in the past and may continue to enter into strategic transactions, including acquisitions of companies, asset purchases and in-licensing of intellectual property with the potential to acquire and advance new assets or product candidates where we believe we are well qualified to optimize the development of promising therapies. For example, we were founded in January 2021, and subsequently acquired envu via a stock purchase of FronThera U.S. Holdings, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, FronThera U.S. Pharmaceuticals LLC. Additionally, we consummated the ACELYRIN Merger in May 2025 and acquired lonigutamab. Additional potential transactions that we may consider in the future include a variety of business arrangements, including strategic partnerships, in-licensing or out-licensing of product candidates, strategic collaborations, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. Any such transactions could increase our near and long-term expenditures, result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, including our common stock, or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses or acquired in-process research and development expenses, any of which could affect our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.
Future acquisitions may also require us to obtain additional financing, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all. These transactions may never be successful and may require significant time and attention of our management. Even if we are able to successfully identify and acquire complementary products, technologies or businesses, we cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully manage the risks associated with integrating acquired products, technologies or businesses or the risks arising from anticipated and unanticipated problems in connection with an acquisition or in-licensing transaction. For example, as a result of the ACELYRIN Merger, we now operate our historical core business along with the acquired ACELYRIN business as one combined organization utilizing common information and communication systems, operating procedures, financial controls and human resources practices. There may be difficulties, costs and delays involved in the integration of our historical core business with the acquired ACELYRIN business, including as a result of challenges relating to the diversion of management’s attention, the possibility of faulty assumptions underlying expectations regarding the integration process, retaining and attracting business and operational relationships, eliminating duplicative operations and inconsistent standards and procedures and increased or unforeseen liabilities or costs relating to the ACELYRIN Merger or the acquired ACELYRIN business. We have also incurred substantial expenses in connection with and as a result of completing the ACELYRIN Merger and may incur additional expenses as we continue to finalize integration of the businesses, operations, policies and procedures of the combined company. Further, while we seek to mitigate risks and liabilities of potential acquisitions and in-licensing transactions through, among other things, due diligence, there may be risks and liabilities that such due diligence efforts fail to discover, that are not disclosed to us, or that we inadequately assess. Any failure in identifying and managing these risks, liabilities and uncertainties effectively, including in connection with the ACELYRIN Merger, could have a material adverse effect on our business and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, we may not realize the anticipated benefits of such transactions, including the possibility that expected synergies and accretion will not be realized or will not be realized within the expected time frame. Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any additional transactions of the nature described above, any additional transactions
Table of Contents
that we do complete could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes to offset taxable income or taxes may be limited.
We have incurred substantial losses during our history and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2025, we had U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards of $281.2 million and U.S. states net operating loss carryforwards of $5.9 million. Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”), our U.S. federal net operating losses arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such U.S. federal net operating losses in a taxable year is limited to 80% of taxable income in such year.
In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. As of December 31, 2025, we completed a Section 382 analysis which indicated that we have experienced an ownership change and resulted in the expiration of U.S. federal net credits before utilization and, as such, we recognized a reduction of deferred tax assets. There may be additional ownership changes in the future, some of which may be outside of our control. If we undergo an ownership change, and our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset our post-change income or taxes (if any) is limited, such limitation could harm our future results of operations by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our use of accumulated state tax attributes. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating losses is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. As a result, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our net operating losses and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.
Recent and future changes to tax laws could materially adversely affect our company.
The tax regimes we are subject to or operate under, including with respect to income and non-income taxes, are unsettled and may be subject to significant change. Changes in tax laws, regulations or rulings, or changes in interpretations of existing laws and regulations, could materially adversely affect our company. The OBBBA enacted in July 2025, the Inflation Reduction Act (“IRA”) enacted in 2022, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act enacted in 2020, and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted in 2017 made many significant changes to the U.S. tax laws. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act required taxpayers to capitalize and amortize U.S.-based and non-U.S.-based research and experimental (“R&E”) expenditures over five and fifteen years, respectively. The OBBBA restores the deductibility of domestic R&E expenditures in the year incurred for tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, but retains the capitalization and amortization requirement for foreign R&E expenditures. In addition, the IRA includes provisions that impact the U.S. federal income taxation of certain corporations, including a 15% minimum tax on the book income of certain large corporations and a 1% excise tax on certain corporate stock repurchases that is imposed on the corporation repurchasing such stock. Future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to such legislation may affect us, and certain aspects thereof could be repealed or modified in future legislation, possibly with retroactive effect. Additionally, many countries in Europe, as well as a number of other countries and organizations (including the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the European Commission), have proposed, recommended, or (in the case of countries) enacted changes to existing tax laws or new tax laws that could significantly increase our tax obligations in the countries where we do business or require us to change the manner in which we operate our business.
If our information technology systems, or those used by our CROs, CMOs, clinical sites or other third parties with whom we work, or our data are or were compromised, become unavailable or suffer security breaches, loss or leakage of data or other disruptions, we could suffer material adverse consequences resulting from such compromise, including but not limited to, operational or service interruption, harm to our reputation, regulatory investigations or actions, litigation, fines, penalties and liability, and other adverse consequences to our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
Table of Contents
In the ordinary course of our business, we, and the third parties with whom we work, process personal information and other sensitive data, including intellectual property, trade secrets, proprietary or confidential business information, preclinical and clinical trial data, personal information related to relevant stakeholders, third-party data, and other sensitive data (collectively, sensitive information) and as a result, we and the third parties with whom we work face a variety of evolving threats which could cause security incidents affecting or interruptions to our information technology systems and sensitive information.
Our information technology systems and those of our CROs, CMOs, clinical sites and other third parties with whom we work are vulnerable to attack, damage and interruption from a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to computer viruses, misconfigurations, software bugs, worms, or other vulnerabilities and malicious codes, malware (including ransomware and as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), application security attacks, social engineering (including through phishing attacks and deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake), supply chain attacks and vulnerabilities through our third-party service providers, denial or degradation-of-service attacks (such as credential stuffing), credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, fraud, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, attacks enhanced or facilitated by AI, adware, telecommunications and electrical failures, terrorism, war, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. Such threats are prevalent, are occurring more often, are increasingly difficult to detect, and come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation states, and nation-state-supported actors. In particular, ransomware attacks, including those from organized criminal threat actors, nation-states and nation-state supported actors, are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions, delays, or outages in our operations, loss of data (including sensitive information), loss of income, significant extra expenses to restore data or systems, reputational loss, the diversion of funds and other consequences. To alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, it may be preferable to make extortion payments, but we may be unwilling or unable to do so (including, for example, if applicable laws or regulations prohibit such payments). Threat actors may also gain access to other networks and systems after a compromise of our networks and systems. For example, threat actors may use an initial compromise of one part of our environment to gain access to other parts of our environment, or leverage a compromise of our networks or systems to gain access to the networks or systems of third parties with whom we work, such as through phishing or supply chain attacks.
Some actors also now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyberattacks, including without limitation nation-state actors, for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we, and the third parties with whom we work, may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyberattacks, that could materially disrupt our systems, operations and supply chain. In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect or infer sensitive data about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position.
Additionally, remote work has become more common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our personnel utilize network connections, computers and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit and in public locations.
Furthermore, future or past business transactions (such as the ACELYRIN Merger or other acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Additionally, we may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate acquired entities into our information technology environment and security program.
We have in the past and may in the future expend significant resources and modify our business activities to try to protect against security incidents. While we take steps designed to anticipate, detect and remediate threats and vulnerabilities, because the threats and techniques used to exploit such vulnerabilities and gain unauthorized access to, to sabotage or otherwise compromise systems change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and are often not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement and maintain adequate preventative measures. Therefore, such vulnerabilities have and could be exploited but may not be detected until after a
Table of Contents
security incident has occurred. We may also experience security breaches that may remain undetected for an extended period. Even if identified, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities and we may be unable to adequately investigate or remediate incidents or breaches due to attackers increasingly using tools and techniques that are designed to circumvent controls, to avoid detection, and to remove or obfuscate forensic evidence. There can be no assurance that our information security policies, controls or procedures, will be fully implemented, complied with or effective in protecting our systems and sensitive information.
Our reliance on third-party service providers could introduce additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, including supply-chain attacks and other threats to our business operations. We rely on third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems and to process sensitive information in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, cloud-based infrastructure, data hosting, encryption and authentication technology, personnel email, human resource management, training and other functions. We also rely on third-party service providers to assist with our clinical trials or otherwise to operate our business, including to manage and store sensitive patient data from our clinical trials. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. Our third-party service providers have and may in the future experience a security incident or other interruption. While we may be entitled to damages if our third-party service providers fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award. In addition, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties and infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised or that they do not contain exploitable defects or bugs that could result in a breach of or disruption to our information technology systems or the third-party information technology systems that support our operations.
We and certain of our service providers have been and are from time to time subject to cyberattacks and security incidents. Any of the previously identified or similar threats have or could cause a security incident or other interruption that resulted or results in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure, or other processing of, or access to our sensitive information or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties with whom we work. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties with whom we work) to conduct clinical trials. Additionally, sensitive information of the company could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employees’, personnel’s, or vendors’ use of generative AI technologies.
The costs related to significant security breaches or disruptions could be material and cause us to incur significant expenses. If the information technology systems of our CROs, CMOs, clinical sites and other third parties become subject to disruptions or security incidents, we may have insufficient recourse against such third parties and we may have to expend significant resources to mitigate the impact of such an event, and to develop and implement protections to prevent future events of this nature from occurring. Our contracts may not contain liability limitations and, even where they do, there can be no assurance that such limitations are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations. Further, our cyber liability insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover the financial, legal, business reputational or other losses that may result from an interruption or breach.
Security incidents have and could result in a disruption of our business and development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing clinical trials for a product candidate could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data, or may limit our ability to effectively execute a product recall, if required in the future. To the extent that any disruption or security incident were to result in the loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information, we could incur liability and the further development of any product candidates could be delayed.
Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us, or we may voluntarily choose, to notify relevant stakeholders, including affected individuals, regulators, and investors, of security incidents, or take other actions, such as providing credit monitoring and identify theft protection services. Such disclosures and related actions can be costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such applicable requirements could lead to adverse consequences.
Security incidents (or perceived security incidents), may result in material adverse consequences such as legal claims or proceedings, liability including litigation exposure, penalties and fines under relevant legal obligations, enforcement
Table of Contents
actions and investigations by regulatory authorities, additional reporting requirements or oversight, restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal information), indemnification obligations, monetary fund diversions, diversion of management attention, other financial loss, and damage to our reputation and a loss of confidence in us and our ability to conduct clinical trials, which could delay the clinical development of our product candidates, and of which may adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Our operations are predominantly concentrated in one location, and we or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by a wildfire, earthquake or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.
Our current operations are predominantly located in California. Any unplanned event, such as flood, wildfire, explosion, earthquake, extreme weather condition, medical epidemic, power shortage, telecommunication failure or other natural or manmade accidents or incidents that result in us being unable to fully utilize our facilities may have a material and adverse effect on our ability to operate our business, particularly on a daily basis, and have significant negative consequences on our financial and operating conditions. Any similar impacts of natural or manmade disasters on our third-party service providers, such as our CMOs and CROs located globally, could cause delays in our clinical trials and may have a material and adverse effect on our ability to operate our business and have significant negative consequences on our financial and operating conditions. If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using our clinical trial sites, impacted clinical supply or the conduct of our clinical trials, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as the manufacturing facilities of our third-party CMOs, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible, for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans that we and third parties upon whom we rely have or may have in place may prove inadequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. As part of our risk management policy, we maintain insurance coverage at levels that we believe are appropriate for our business. However, in the event of an accident or incident at these facilities, we cannot assure you that the amounts of insurance will be sufficient to satisfy any damages and losses. If our facilities, or the manufacturing facilities of our CMOs, are unable to operate because of an accident or incident or for any other reason, even for a short period of time, any or all of our development programs may be harmed. Any business interruption could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Our projections regarding the market opportunities for our product candidates may not be accurate, and the actual market for our products may be smaller than we estimate.
The precise incidence and prevalence for all the conditions we aim to address with our product candidates are unknown. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including sales of our competitors, scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations or market research, and may prove to be incorrect in general, or as to their applicability to our company. Further, new trials may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The total addressable market across all of our product candidates will ultimately depend upon, among other things, the diagnosis criteria included in the final labeling for each of our product candidates approved for sale for these indications, the ability of our product candidates to improve on the safety, convenience, cost and efficacy of competing therapies or therapies in development, acceptance by the medical community and patients, drug pricing and reimbursement. The number of patients in the United States and other major markets and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our product candidates or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Further, even if we obtain significant market share for our product candidates, because some of our potential target populations are very small, we may never achieve profitability despite obtaining such significant market share.
Our cash and cash equivalents may be exposed to failure of our banking institutions.
While we seek to minimize our exposure to third-party losses of our cash and cash equivalents, we hold our balances in a number of large financial institutions. Notwithstanding, those institutions are subject to risk of failure. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) as receiver. Similarly, on March 12,
Table of Contents
2023, Signature Bank was also swept into receivership. The U.S. Department of Treasury, the Federal Reserve Board (the “Federal Reserve”), and the FDIC released a statement that indicated that all depositors of SVB would have access to all of their funds, including funds held in uninsured deposit accounts, after only one business day of closure. The U.S. Department of Treasury, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve have announced a program to provide up to $25 billion of loans to financial institutions secured by certain of such government securities held by financial institutions to mitigate the risk of potential losses on the sale of such instruments, widespread demands for customer withdrawals or other liquidity needs of financial institutions for immediately liquidity may exceed the capacity of such program. There is no guarantee, however, that the U.S. Department of Treasury, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve will provide access to uninsured funds in the future in the event of the closure of other banks or financial institutions, or that they would do so in a timely fashion.
Although we expect to assess our banking relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to cash in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect the financial institutions with which we have banking relationships, and in turn, us.
These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry. These factors could also include factors involving financial markets or the financial services industry generally. The results of events or concerns that involve one or more of these factors could include a variety of material and adverse impacts on our current and projected business operations and our financial condition and results of operations. These could include, but may not be limited to, delayed access to deposits or other financial assets or the uninsured loss of deposits or other financial assets; or termination of cash management arrangements and/or delays in accessing or actual loss of funds subject to cash management arrangements.
In addition, widespread investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, financial obligations or fulfill our other obligations, result in breaches of our financial and/or contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws. Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity and our current and/or projected business operations and financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, one or more of our critical vendors, third party manufacturers, or other business partners could be adversely affected by any of the liquidity or other risks that are described above, which in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our current and/or projected business operations and results of operations and financial condition. Any business partner bankruptcy or insolvency, or any breach or default by a business partner, or the loss of any significant supplier relationships, could result in material adverse impacts on our current and/or projected business operations and financial condition.
Public opinion and scrutiny of immunology treatments may impact public perception of our company and product candidates, or may adversely affect our ability to conduct our business and our business plans.
Public perception may be influenced by claims, such as claims that our product candidates are unsafe, unethical or immoral and, consequently, our approach may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. Adverse public attitudes may also adversely impact our ability to enroll clinical trials. Moreover, our success will depend upon physicians specializing in the treatment of those diseases that our product candidates target prescribing, and their patients being willing to receive, treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments they are already familiar with and for which greater clinical data may be available. AEs in our clinical trials, even if not ultimately attributable to our product candidates, and the resulting publicity could result in withdrawal of clinical trial participants, increased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates. In addition, side effects generally associated with TYK2 or JAK
Table of Contents
inhibitors may negatively impact public perception of us or envu and A-005. More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and may delay or impair the development and, if approved, commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop.
The future impairment of acquired in-process research and development (“IPR&D”) intangible assets related to the ACELYRIN Merger may negatively affect our results of operations and financial position.
As of December 31, 2025, we had $51.0 million of acquired IPR&D intangible assets related to the ACELYRIN Merger. In-process research and development assets are subject to an impairment analysis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable. Additionally, indefinite-lived assets are subject to an impairment test at least annually. Events giving rise to impairment are an inherent risk in the pharmaceutical industry and cannot be predicted. Our results of operations and financial position in future periods could be negatively impacted should future impairments of acquired IPR&D intangible assets occur.
Risks Related to Intellectual Property
If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient intellectual property protection for our product candidates and any future product candidates we may develop, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors or other third parties could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected.
We rely upon a combination of patents, know-how and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our product candidates and technologies and to prevent third parties from copying and surpassing our achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries for our product candidates and their uses, as well as our ability to operate without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the proprietary rights of others. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our product candidates and novel discoveries that are important to our business. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued. We cannot assure you that issued patents will afford sufficient protection of our product candidates or their intended uses against competitors, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, invalidated by third parties, or effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive products or product candidates.
Obtaining and enforcing patents is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications or maintain and/or enforce patents that may issue based on our patent applications, at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. We may not be able to obtain or maintain patent applications and patents due to the subject matter claimed in such patent applications and patents being in disclosures in the public domain. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development results before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we have in the past and will continue to enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, CMOs, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach these agreements and disclose such results before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent any third parties from using any of our technology that is in the public domain to compete with our product candidates.
Composition of matter patents for pharmaceutical product candidates often provide a strong form of intellectual property protection for those types of products, as such patents provide protection without regard to any method of use. However, we cannot be certain that the claims in our pending patent applications directed to composition of matter of our product candidates will be considered patentable by the USPTO or by patent offices in foreign countries, or that the claims in any of our issued patents will be considered valid and enforceable by courts in the United States or foreign countries. Method of use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method. This type of patent does not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product candidates for an indication that is outside the scope of the
Table of Contents
patented method. Moreover, even if competitors do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications, clinicians may prescribe these products “off-label.” Although off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method of use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute.
The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation, resulting in court decisions, including Supreme Court decisions, which have increased uncertainties as to the ability to enforce patent rights in the future. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of any patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future owned or in-licensed patent applications may not result in issued patents that protect our product candidates effectively to prevent others from commercializing our product candidates or otherwise provide any competitive advantage. In fact, patent applications may not issue as patents at all. The coverage claimed in a patent application can also be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, or vice versa.
The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability and our pending patent applications may be challenged in patent offices in the United States and abroad. Even issued patents may later be found invalid or unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. For example, our pending patent applications may be subject to third-party pre-issuance submissions of prior art to the USPTO, or our issued patents may be subject to post-grant review (“PGR”) proceedings, oppositions, derivations, reexaminations, interferences, inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings or other similar proceedings, in the United States or elsewhere, challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. Such submissions may also be made prior to a patent’s issuance, precluding the granting of a patent based on one or more of our owned pending patent applications. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical product candidates, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our product candidates. Such challenges also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
A third party may also claim that our patent rights are invalid or unenforceable in a litigation. An adverse result in any legal proceeding could put one or more of our owned or patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could allow third parties to commercialize our products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize our technology, products or product candidates without infringing third-party patent rights.
In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. Any failure to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to our product candidates or their uses could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We cannot ensure that patent rights relating to inventions described and claimed in our or any current or future licensors and licensees pending patent applications will issue or that patents based on our or any current or future licensors and licensees patent applications will not be challenged and rendered invalid and/or unenforceable.
The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators will be successful in protecting our product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. We have several pending United States and foreign patent applications in our portfolio. We cannot predict:
if and when patents may issue based on our patent applications;
the scope of protection of any patent issuing based on our patent applications;
Table of Contents
whether the claims of any patent issuing based on our patent applications will provide protection against competitors;
whether or not third parties will find ways to invalidate or circumvent our patent rights;
whether or not others will obtain patents claiming aspects similar to those covered by our patents and patent applications;
whether we will need to initiate litigation or administrative proceedings to enforce and/or defend our patent rights which will be costly whether we win or lose; or
whether the patent applications that we own will result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates or uses thereof in the United States or in other foreign countries.
We cannot be certain that the claims in our or any current or future licensors’ pending patent applications directed to our product candidates will be considered patentable by the USPTO or by patent offices in foreign countries. There can be no assurance that any such patent applications will issue as granted patents. One aspect of the determination of patentability of our or any current or future licensors’ inventions depends on the scope and content of the “prior art,” information that was or is deemed available to a person of skill in the relevant art prior to the priority date of the claimed invention. There may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the patentability of our or any current or future licensors’ patent claims or, if issued, affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim. Even if the patents do issue based on our or any current or future licensors’ patent applications, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, patents in our or any current or future licensors’ portfolio may not adequately exclude third parties from practicing relevant technology or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of our intellectual property position with respect to our product candidates is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop and threaten our ability to commercialize our product candidates. In the event of litigation or administrative proceedings, we cannot be certain that the claims in any of our issued patents will be considered valid by courts in the United States or foreign countries.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Patents are of national or regional effect, and filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our research programs and product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States, even in jurisdictions where we do pursue patent protection. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our or any current or future licensors’ inventions in all countries outside the United States, even in jurisdictions where we or any current or future licensors do pursue patent protection, or from selling or importing products made using our or any current or future licensors’ inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our or any current or future licensors’ technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we or any current or future licensors have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These competitor products may compete with our product candidates, and our or any current or future licensors’ patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Various companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of many countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to pharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our or any current or future licensors’ patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights.
Certain countries outside the United States have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. As a result, a patent owner may have limited remedies in certain circumstances, which could
Table of Contents
materially diminish the value of such patent. If we or any current or future licensors are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license in the future.
Further, the standards applied by the USPTO and foreign patent offices in granting patents are not always applied uniformly or predictably. As such, we do not know the degree of future protection that we will have on our product candidates. While we will endeavor to try to protect our product candidates with intellectual property rights, such as patents, as appropriate, the process of obtaining patents is time consuming, expensive and unpredictable.
Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.
The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:
others may be able to make product candidates that are similar to ours but that are not covered by the pending patent applications that we own or any patents or patent applications that we currently in-license or may in-license in the future;
we or any current or future licensors or collaborators might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the pending patent application that we own or may in-license in the future;
we or any current or future licensors or collaborators might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our or their inventions;
others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing or otherwise violating our owned intellectual property rights or any patent applications that we may license in the future;
it is possible that noncompliance with the USPTO and foreign governmental patent agencies requirement for a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent process can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, and partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction;
it is possible that our pending owned patent applications or those that we may own or license in the future will not lead to issued patents;
issued patents, if any arise in the future, that we either own or that we may license in the future may be revoked, modified, or held invalid or unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our competitors;
others may have access to the same intellectual property rights licensed to us in the future on a non-exclusive basis;
our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets;
we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable;
we cannot predict the scope of protection of any patent issuing based on our or any current or future licensors’ patent applications, including whether the patent applications that we own, or, in the future, in-license will result
Table of Contents
in issued patents with claims directed to our product candidates or uses thereof in the United States or in other foreign countries;
there may be significant pressure on the United States government and international governmental bodies to limit the scope of patent protection both inside and outside the United States for disease treatments that prove successful, as a matter of public policy regarding worldwide health concerns;
countries other than the United States may have patent laws less favorable to patentees than those upheld by United States courts, allowing foreign competitors a better opportunity to create, develop and market competing product candidates; the claims of any patent issuing based on our patent applications may not provide protection against competitors or any competitive advantages, or may be challenged by third parties;
if enforced, a court may not hold that our patents, if they issue in the future, are valid, enforceable and infringed;
we may need to initiate litigation or administrative proceedings to enforce and/or defend our patent rights which will be costly whether we win or lose;
we may choose not to file a patent application in order to maintain certain trade secrets or know-how, and a third party may subsequently file a patent application covering such intellectual property;
we may fail to adequately protect and police our trademarks and trade secrets; and
the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business, including if others obtain patents claiming subject matter similar to or improving that covered by our patent applications.
Should any of these or similar events occur, they could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent, which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our product candidates.
As the biopharmaceutical industry expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties. There can be no assurance that our operations do not, or will not in the future, infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate existing or future third-party patents or other intellectual property rights. Identification of third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our operations is difficult because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction.
Numerous United States and foreign patents and pending patent applications exist in our market that are owned by third parties. Our competitors in both the United States and abroad, many of which have substantially greater resources and have made substantial investments in patent portfolios and competing technologies, may have applied for or obtained or may in the future apply for and obtain, patents that will prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use and sell our product candidates. We do not always conduct independent reviews of pending patent applications and patents issued to third parties. Patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are typically published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Certain United States applications that will not be filed outside the United States can remain confidential until patents issue. In addition, patent applications in the United States and elsewhere can be pending for many years before issuance, or unintentionally abandoned patents or applications can be revived. Furthermore, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could
Table of Contents
cover our product candidates or the use of our product candidates. As such, there may be applications of others now pending or recently revived patents of which we are unaware. These patent applications may later result in issued patents, or the revival of previously abandoned patents, that may be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of our product candidates or will prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use or sell our product candidates.
The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect. For example, we may incorrectly determine that our product candidates are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our product candidates.
We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents and other intellectual property rights do not exist which might be enforced against our current technology, including our research programs, product candidates, their respective methods of use, manufacture and formulations thereof, and could result in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.
We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.
Competitors or other third parties may infringe our patents, trademarks or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we or any current or future licensors may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Our or any current or future licensors’ pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents or any current or future licensors’ patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement, insufficient written description or failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. In any patent infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent of ours or any current or future licensors is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. There is also a risk that, even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court will construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that our or any current or future licensors’ patent claims do not cover the invention, or decide that the other party’s use of our or any current or future licensors’ patented technology falls under the safe harbor to patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(e)(1). An adverse outcome in a litigation or proceeding involving our or any current or future licensors’ patents could limit our ability to assert our or any current or future licensors’ patents against those parties or other competitors and may curtail or preclude our ability to exclude third parties from making and selling similar or competitive products. Any of these occurrences could adversely affect our competitive position, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks.
Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during litigation. There could also be public announcements
Table of Contents
of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could adversely affect the price of shares of our common stock. Moreover, we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient financial or other resources to file and pursue such infringement claims, which typically last for years before they are concluded. Even if we ultimately prevail in such claims, the monetary cost of such litigation and the diversion of the attention of our management and scientific personnel could outweigh any benefit we receive as a result of the proceedings.
We may become involved in third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, which may prevent or delay our product discovery and development efforts.
Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation involving the infringement of patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may be exposed to, or threatened with, future litigation by third parties having patent or other intellectual property rights and who allege that our product candidates, uses and/or other proprietary technologies infringe their intellectual property rights. Numerous United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk that our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others increases. Moreover, it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents exist which may be found to cover various types of drugs, products or their methods of use or manufacture. Thus, because of the large number of patents issued and patent applications currently pending in our fields, there may be a risk that third parties may allege they have patent rights which are infringed by our product candidates, technologies or methods.
If a third party alleges that we infringe its intellectual property rights, we may face a number of issues, including, but not limited to:
infringement and other intellectual property misappropriation which, regardless of merit, may be expensive and time-consuming to litigate and may divert our management’s attention from our core business;
substantial damages for infringement or misappropriation, which we may have to pay if a court decides that the product candidate or technology at issue infringes on or violates the third-party’s rights, and, if the court finds we have willfully infringed intellectual property rights, we could be ordered to pay treble damages and the patent owner’s attorneys’ fees;
an injunction prohibiting us from manufacturing, marketing or selling our product candidates, or from using our proprietary technologies, unless the third party agrees to license its patent rights to us;
even if a license is available from a third party, we may have to pay substantial royalties, upfront fees and other amounts, and/or grant cross-licenses to intellectual property rights protecting our products; and
we may be forced to try to redesign our product candidates or processes so they do not infringe third-party intellectual property rights, an undertaking which may not be possible or which may require substantial monetary expenditures and time.
Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.
Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Generally, conducting preclinical and clinical trials and other development activities in the United States is not considered an act of infringement. While we may believe that patent claims or other intellectual property rights of a third party would not have a materially adverse effect on the commercialization of our product candidates, we may be incorrect in this belief, or we may not be able to prove it in litigation. In this regard, patents issued in the United States by law enjoy a presumption of validity that
Table of Contents
can be rebutted only with evidence that is “clear and convincing,” a heightened standard of proof. There may be issued third-party patents of which we are currently unaware with claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates.
Patent applications can take many years to issue. There may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that may be infringed by our product candidates. Moreover, we may fail to identify relevant patents or incorrectly conclude that a patent is invalid, not enforceable, exhausted, or not infringed by our activities. If any third-party patents, held now or obtained in the future by a third party, were found by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of our product candidates, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or they are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Similarly, if any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover any aspect of our formulations, any combination therapies or patient selection methods, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, may be impaired or delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. Even if we obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.
Parties making claims against us may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need or may choose to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly.
We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses.
Because our development programs may in the future require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these third-party proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are able to in-license any such necessary intellectual property, it could be on nonexclusive terms, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same intellectual property licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have obtained, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We may enter into license agreements in the future with others to advance our existing or future research or allow
Table of Contents
commercialization of our existing or future product candidates, if approved. These licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology and product candidates in the future. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, if approved, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current manufacturing methods, product candidates, or future methods or product candidates resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.
We may become subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our or any current or future licensors’ patents and other intellectual property.
We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our or any current or future licensors’ patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our product candidates or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could adversely affect our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.
Any current or future licensors may have relied on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties, such as the United States government, such that these licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other third parties have ownership rights or other rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could adversely affect our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Such claims could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We have and may continue to form or seek collaborations or strategic alliances or enter into licensing arrangements in the future, and we may neither enter into, nor realize the benefits of, such alliances or licensing arrangements.
The current, and any future, collaborations that we enter into may not be successful and we may not enter into such collaborations at all. The success of our collaboration arrangements will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of any future collaborators. Collaborations are subject to numerous risks, which may include that:
collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to collaborations;
collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on trial or test results, changes in their strategic focus due to the acquisition of competitive products, availability of funding or other external factors,
Table of Contents
such as a business combination that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;
collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates;
a collaborator with marketing, manufacturing and distribution rights to one or more products may not commit sufficient resources to or otherwise not perform satisfactorily in carrying out these activities;
we could grant exclusive rights to our collaborators that would prevent us from collaborating with others;
collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our intellectual property or proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatened litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential liability;
disputes may arise between us and a collaborator that causes the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our future product candidates or that results in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;
collaborations may be terminated, and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable future product candidates;
collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering our product candidates that results from our collaborating with them, and in such cases, we would not have the exclusive right to develop or commercialize such intellectual property; and
a collaborator’s sales and marketing activities or other operations may not be in compliance with applicable laws, resulting in civil or criminal proceedings.
If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we in-license or acquire development or commercialization rights to product candidates, or data from third parties, we could lose such rights that are important to our business.
We are heavily reliant upon licenses to certain patent rights and other intellectual property for the development of lonigutamab. For example, we depend on licenses from Pierre Fabre for certain intellectual property relating to the development and commercialization of lonigutamab, respectively, in specific territories.
Pierre Fabre may have relied upon, and any future licensors may rely upon, third-party companies, consultants or collaborators, or on funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If our licensors, including Pierre Fabre, fail to prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend such patents, or lose rights to those patents, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize lonigutamab could be adversely affected. Further development and commercialization of lonigutamab and development of any other future product candidates may require us to enter into additional license or collaboration agreements. For example, our licensors or other third parties may develop intellectual property covering lonigutamab which we have not licensed. Our future licenses may not provide us with exclusive rights to use the licensed patent rights and other intellectual property licensed thereunder, or may not provide us with exclusive rights to use such patent rights and intellectual property in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we wish to develop or commercialize lonigutamab or our other product candidates in the future.
In spite of our efforts, licensors such as Pierre Fabre might conclude that we are in material breach of obligations under our license agreements and may therefore have the right to terminate the license agreements, thereby removing our ability to develop and commercialize product candidates and technology covered by such license agreements. If such in-licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, our competitors would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to our product candidates and the licensors to such in-
Table of Contents
licenses could prevent us from developing or commercializing product candidates that rely upon the patents or other intellectual property rights which were the subject matter of such terminated agreements. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties (potentially including our competitors) to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses and compete with our existing product candidates. Any of these events could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:
the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
our financial or other obligations under the license agreement;
the extent to which our processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;
the sublicensing of patent and other rights under our collaborative development relationships;
our diligence obligations under the license agreement and what activities satisfy those obligations;
the inventorship or ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners; and
the priority of invention of patented technology.
In addition, our license agreements are, and any future license agreements are likely to be, complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations.
The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed or may license in the future prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current or future licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We have entered into, and may in the future enter into, license agreements that subject us to certain rights retained by third parties.
We have entered into a regional collaboration and license agreement (the “Kaken Collaboration Agreement”) with Kaken Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Kaken”) pursuant to which we have granted Kaken an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize envu for dermatology indications in Japan. Under the Kaken Collaboration Agreement, Kaken has options to expand the license into rheumatological and gastrointestinal indications in Japan, and Kaken is responsible for the clinical development, regulatory approvals and commercialization of envu in Japan in dermatology and other indications for which Kaken has exercised its option. We retain global rights to envu outside of those granted to Kaken. In addition, any future licensors may retain certain rights under the relevant agreements with us, including the right to use the underlying product candidates for academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the product candidates, to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the product candidates, or to develop or commercialize the licensed product candidates in certain regions.
In addition, the United States federal government retains certain rights in inventions produced with its financial assistance under the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act (the “Bayh-Dole Act”). The federal government retains a
Table of Contents
“nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license” for its own benefit. The Bayh-Dole Act also provides federal agencies with “march-in rights.” March-in rights allow the government, in specified circumstances, to require the contractor or successors in title to the patent to grant a “nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license” to a “responsible applicant or applicants.” If the patent owner refuses to do so, the government may grant the license itself. We may at times choose to collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development. While we do not currently engage, and it is our policy to avoid engaging, university partners in projects in which there is a risk that federal funds may be commingled, we cannot be sure that any co-developed intellectual property will be free from government rights pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act. If, in the future, we co-own or license technology which is critical to our business that is developed in whole or in part with federal funds subject to the Bayh-Dole Act, our ability to enforce or otherwise exploit patents covering such technology may be adversely affected.
Changes in patent law in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates.
As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining, defending, maintaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents, and may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain, enforce and protect our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our future owned and licensed patents. Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), signed into law on September 16, 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications filed after March 2013 and the enforcement or defense of our future issued patents or claiming priority to patent applications filed after March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including PGR, IPR, and derivation proceedings.
Further, because of a lower evidentiary standard in these USPTO post-grant proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our or any current or future licensors’ patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our or any current or future licensors’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or any current or future licensors’ future issued patents, all of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before we file an application covering the same invention, could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours or any current or future licensors even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or any current or future licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or any current or future licensors’ patents or patent applications. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase
Table of Contents
the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our future issued patents, all of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. The United States Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Depending on future actions by the United States Congress, the United States courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our or any current or future licensors’ ability to obtain new patents and patents that we or any current or future licensors might obtain in the future. We cannot predict how future decisions by the courts, the United States Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents. Any similar adverse change in the patent laws of other jurisdictions could also adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
In 2012, the European Union Patent Package (“EU Patent Package”) regulations were passed with the goal of providing a single pan-European Unitary Patent and a new European Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) for litigation involving European patents. The EU Patent Package was implemented on June 1, 2023. As a result, all European patents, including those issued prior to ratification of the EU Patent Package, now by default automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. It is uncertain how the UPC will impact granted European patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. Our European patent applications, if issued, could be challenged in the UPC. During the first seven years of the UPC’s existence, the UPC legislation allows a patent owner to opt its European patents out of the jurisdiction of the UPC. We may decide to opt out our future European patents from the UPC, but doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the UPC. Moreover, if we do not meet all of the formalities and requirements for opt-out under the UPC, our future European patents could remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC. The UPC will provide our competitors with a new forum to centrally revoke our European patents and allow for the possibility of a competitor to obtain pan-European injunction. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize our technology and product candidates and, resultantly, on our business, financial condition, prospects and results of operations.
Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated as a result of noncompliance with these requirements.
Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our patents and patent applications. We rely on our outside patent counsel to pay these fees due to United States and non-United States patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-United States government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on products or product candidates for an adequate amount of time.
Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest United States non-provisional or international patent application filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our products or product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of products or new product candidates, patents protecting such products or candidates might expire before or shortly after such products or candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not
Table of Contents
provide us with sufficient and continuing rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.
If we do not obtain patent term extension for our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.
Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA regulatory approval of our product candidates, one or more of our issued United States patents or issued United States patents that we may own in the future may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Action of 1984 (the “Hatch-Waxman Amendments”). The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent extension term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Similar patent term restoration provisions to compensate for commercialization delay caused by regulatory review are also available in certain foreign jurisdictions, such as in Europe under SPC. However, we may not be granted any extensions for which we apply because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents, or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. In addition, to the extent we wish to pursue patent term extension based on a patent that we in-license from a third party, we would need the cooperation of that third party. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension, or the term of any such extension is less than we request, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.
If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.
In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we seek to rely on trade secret protection to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by our patents. We may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. Although we require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and require all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed to our competitors or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Furthermore, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws within the United States. We may need to share our trade secrets and proprietary know-how with current or future partners, collaborators, contractors and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, including through direct intrusion by private parties or foreign actors, and those affiliated with or controlled by state actors. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. If we are unable to prevent unauthorized material disclosure of our intellectual property to third parties, we will not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.
Monitoring and detecting unauthorized disclosure or other compromise of trade secrets is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to prevent such compromise are, or will be, adequate. If we were to enforce a claim that a third party had illegally obtained and was using our trade secrets, it would be expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome would be unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. If we choose to go to court to stop a third party from using any of our trade secrets, we may incur substantial costs. These lawsuits may consume our time and other resources even if we are successful. For example, significant elements of our business, including confidential aspects of sample preparation, methods of manufacturing, proprietary assays, computational-biological algorithms, data analytics and machine learning related to genetics, genomics, proteomics, biomarkers and samples, and related processes and software, are based on unpatented trade secrets, including those of our collaborators. For example, our collaborator, Foresite Labs, utilizes extensive trade secret algorithms, machine learning and AI analysis techniques, and we rely on their maintenance of these trade secrets. Although we take steps to protect our
Table of Contents
proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology.
We may be subject to claims asserting that our employees, consultants or advisors have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their current or former employers or claims asserting ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.
Certain of our employees, consultants or advisors have in the past and may in the future be employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that these individuals or we have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s current or former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights. An inability to incorporate such technologies or features would harm our business and may prevent us from successfully commercializing our technologies or product candidates. In addition, we may lose personnel as a result of such claims and any such litigation, or the threat thereof, may adversely affect our ability to hire employees or contract with independent contractors. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to commercialize our technologies, or product candidates, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.
In addition, we may in the future be subject to claims by former employees, consultants or other third parties asserting an ownership right in our patents or patent applications. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar technology and therapeutics, without payment to us, or could limit the duration of the patent protection covering our technologies and product candidates. Such challenges may also result in our inability to develop, manufacture or commercialize our technologies and product candidates without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future technologies and product candidates. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.
Our unregistered trademarks, trade names or future registered trademarks may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections of our applications by the USPTO or in other foreign jurisdictions. Although we are given an opportunity to respond to such rejections, we may be unable to overcome them. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, which may not survive such proceedings. Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our product candidate in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. Similar requirements exist in Europe. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA. Furthermore, in many countries, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark.
We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition among potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors or other third parties may adopt
Table of Contents
trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively, and our business may be adversely affected. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, domain name or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Risks Related to Government Regulation
Even if we receive regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal. We may also be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.
Any regulatory approvals that we or our future collaborators obtain for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which a product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate.
In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, post-approval monitoring and AE reporting, storage, import, export, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. The FDA has significant post-market authority, including the authority to require labeling changes based on new safety information and to require post-market studies or clinical trials to evaluate safety risks related to the use of a product or to require withdrawal of the product from the market. The FDA also has the authority to require a REMS after approval, which may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of an approved drug. Comparable foreign regulatory authorities may have similar authority. The manufacturing facilities we use to make a future product, if any, will also be subject to periodic review and inspection by the FDA and other regulatory authorities, including for continued compliance with cGMP requirements. The discovery of any new or previously unknown problems with our third-party manufacturers, manufacturing processes or facilities may result in restrictions on the product, manufacturer or facility, including withdrawal of the product from the market. As we expect to rely on third-party manufacturers, we will have limited control over compliance with applicable rules and regulations by such manufacturers.
In addition, any product promotion and advertising will also be subject to regulatory requirements and continuing regulatory review. For example, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities impose stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding use of their products. Although clinicians may prescribe products for off-label uses, as the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not regulate a physician’s choice of drug treatment made in the physician’s independent medical judgment, the FDA and such comparable foreign regulatory authorities do restrict promotional communications from companies or their sales force with respect to off-label uses of products. Specifically, any regulatory approval that the FDA grants is limited to those specific diseases and indications for which a product is deemed to be safe and effective by FDA, and our ability to promote any products will be narrowly limited to those indications that are specifically approved by the FDA. Similar restrictions apply in other countries. In the EU, applicable laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics (“SmPC”) which may require approval by the competent national authorities in connection with a marketing authorization. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians concerning the safe and effective use of the product. Promotional activity that does not comply with the SmPC is considered off-label and is prohibited in the EU. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. In addition, if we do not conduct head-to-head comparative clinical trials for our product candidates, we will be unable to make comparative claims regarding any other products in the promotional materials for our product candidates. If we promote our products, if approved, in a manner inconsistent with FDA-approved labeling, or the labeling approved by another comparable foreign regulatory authority, or otherwise not in compliance with FDA
Table of Contents
regulations or comparable foreign rules, we may be subject to enforcement action. The U.S. federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion of off-label use and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed.
Subsequent discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure by us, our contract manufacturers or service providers, or collaborators to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;
restrictions on product distribution or use, or requirements to conduct post-marketing studies or clinical trials;
operating restrictions;
holds on clinical trials;
warning or untitled letters;
refusal by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to approve, or delays in the approval of, pending applications or supplements to approved applications;
suspension, variation or revocation of product approvals;
product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and
injunctions, or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.
The FDA’s and comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay marketing authorization of any product candidates we develop. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision to overturn established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision, the FDA and other agencies may be less inclined to engage in formal regulation and may rely to a greater degree on informal guidance, which may not always be susceptible to immediate challenge. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation or guidance that may arise from future court decisions, legislation, or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.
Recently enacted legislation, future legislation and other healthcare reform measures may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates and may affect the prices we may set.
In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit
Table of Contents
coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare.
For example, in March 2010, the ACA was enacted in the United States, which made a number of substantial changes in the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Since its enactment, there have been amendments and judicial, Congressional and executive branch challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the OBBBA was signed into law, which narrowed access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired ACA subsidies. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.
The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, the CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct-to-consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products and launching an online clearinghouse, referred to as TrumpRx, for patients to purchase certain products from manufacturers on a cash pay basis; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact “The Great Healthcare Plan,” to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could, among other things, impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.
Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing.
We expect that these and any other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The
Table of Contents
implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product candidates, if approved.
Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU member states, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This assessment of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU member states, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the original country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU member states. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU member states. On January 12, 2025, Regulation No 2021/2282 on HTA amending Directive 2011/24/EU, entered into force through a phased implementation depending on the concerned products. The Regulation intends to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products. The Regulation establishes the framework for EU level joint clinical assessments, joint clinical assessments, joint scientific consultations, and the early identification of emerging health technologies. It permits EU member states to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas and requires them to rely on EU-level joint clinical assessment reports for the clinical components of their national HTA evaluations. Individual EU member states will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU member states for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval, any anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for those products in the EU could be negatively affected.
Our operations and relationships with healthcare providers, healthcare organizations and third-party payors will be subject to applicable anti-bribery, anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, transparency and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to, among other things, enforcement actions, criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings.
Our arrangements with healthcare providers, healthcare organizations and third-party payors will expose us to broadly applicable anti-bribery, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, market, sell and distribute our product candidates, if approved. Restrictions under applicable federal, state and foreign anti-bribery and healthcare laws and regulations, include the following:
the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, individuals and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under a federal and state healthcare program such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
the federal criminal and civil false claims laws, including the federal False Claims Act, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions against individuals or entities, and the Federal Civil Monetary Penalties Laws, which prohibit, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. In addition, certain marketing practices, including off-label promotion, may also violate false claims laws. Moreover, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act;
HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability, prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and
Table of Contents
willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, including the Final Omnibus Rule published in January 2013, which impose obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;
the federal legislation commonly referred to as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, enacted as part of the ACA, and its implementing regulations, which requires certain manufacturers of covered drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with certain exceptions, to report annually to CMS information on certain payments and other transfers of value to clinicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), teaching hospitals, and certain other health care providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), as well as ownership and investment interests held by the clinicians described above and their immediate family members;
the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, which prohibits, among other things, U.S. companies and their employees and agents from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to foreign government officials, employees of public international organizations and foreign government owned or affiliated entities, candidates for foreign political office, and foreign political parties or officials thereof;
analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state and foreign anti-kickback and false claims laws, that may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers; and
certain state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the government in addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information related to payments to clinicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and drug pricing information, and state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives.
In the EU, interactions between pharmaceutical companies and healthcare professionals and healthcare organizations are governed by strict laws, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct both at EU level and in the individual EU member states. The provision of benefits or advantages to healthcare professionals to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of pharmaceutical products is prohibited in the EU. Relationships with healthcare professionals and associations are subject to stringent anti-gift statutes and anti-bribery laws, the scope of which differs across the EU. In addition, national transparency and reporting rules may require pharmaceutical companies to report/publish transfers of value provided to healthcare professionals and associations on a regular (e.g. annual) basis.
If we or our future collaborators, manufacturers or service providers fail to comply with applicable federal, state or foreign laws or regulations, we could be subject to enforcement actions, which could affect our ability to develop, market and sell our product candidates successfully and could harm our reputation and lead to reduced acceptance of our products, if approved by the market.
Efforts to ensure that our current and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations could involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any such requirements, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, exclusion from participation in government
Table of Contents
contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid or comparable foreign programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, or reputational harm, any of which could adversely affect our financial results. Any action against us for an alleged or suspected violation could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and could divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business, even if our defense is successful. In addition, achieving and sustaining compliance with applicable laws and regulations may be costly to us in terms of money, time and resources.
Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenue, if any.
In some countries, particularly in the EU, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of regulatory approval for a drug. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a study that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In addition, many countries outside the United States have limited government support programs that provide for reimbursement of drugs such as our product candidates, with an emphasis on private payors for access to commercial products. If reimbursement of our products, if approved, is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be materially harmed.
We and the third parties with whom we work are subject to stringent and evolving U.S. and foreign laws, regulations, rules; contractual obligations; policies; and other obligations related to data privacy and security. Our (including the third parties with whom we work) actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; and other adverse consequences for our business, results of operations and financial condition.
In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process or processing) personal information and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, employee data, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and other sensitive third-party data (collectively, sensitive information). Our data processing activities presently and may in the future subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security.
Various federal, state, local and foreign legislative and regulatory bodies, or self-regulatory organizations, may expand current laws, rules or regulations, enact new laws, rules or regulations or issue revised rules or guidance regarding data privacy and security. Implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or perception of their requirements may have on our business.
In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal information privacy laws, and consumer protection laws. For example, HIPAA imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. We may obtain health information from third parties that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to significant penalties if we violate HIPAA.
Additionally, the CCPA applies to personal information of California consumers, business representatives, and employees, and among other things requires regulated businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of California residents to exercise certain privacy rights, including the right to opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties as well as a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, thereby potentially increasing risks associated with a data breach. In addition, although the CCPA includes limited exceptions, including for certain information collected as part of clinical trials, the CCPA may impact our processing of personal data and our compliance costs depending on how it is interpreted. Similar laws are being considered or have been enacted in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels. While certain U.S. state privacy laws,
Table of Contents
like the CCPA, may also exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these developments further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties with whom we work. In addition to government activity, privacy advocacy groups and technology and other industries are considering various new, additional or different self-regulatory standards that may place additional burdens on us.
There are also various laws, regulations and industry standards in other jurisdictions outside the United States relating to data privacy and security, with which we presently or in the future may need to comply. For example, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (“EU GDPR”) and the UK’s equivalent (“UK GDPR”), collectively, GDPR, impose strict requirements for processing personal information (referred to as “personal data” under the GDPR). Notably, under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions; fines of up to €20 million under the EU GDPR / £17.5 million under the UK GDPR, or, in each case, 4% of the annual global revenue of the noncompliant undertaking, whichever is greater. The GDPR also provides for private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. Additionally, EU member states may introduce further conditions, including limitations, and make their own laws and regulations further limiting the processing of “special categories of personal data,” including personal data related to health, biometric data used for unique identification purposes and genetic information, which could limit our ability to process such special categories of personal data, and could cause our compliance costs to increase, ultimately adversely affecting our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Certain of our employees, other personnel and/or vendors use generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal information in generative AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Any errors, flaws or other unintended issues in or associated with AI inputs, outputs or technologies could result in adverse impacts on our business. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws regulating generative AI. Our, or our vendors’, use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we, or our vendors, are unable to use generative AI, it could make our business less efficient in some cases, and result in increased costs or competitive disadvantages.
In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal information from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal information to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area (the “EEA”) and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal information to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal information from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, and the UK extension thereto (“Data Privacy Framework”) (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Data Privacy Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal information to the United States.
Other jurisdictions may adopt or have already adopted similarly stringent data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal information from the EEA, the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal information necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal information out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. Regulators in the United States are also increasingly scrutinizing certain personal information transfers and have enacted certain restrictions on cross-border date transfers. For example, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a rule entitled the Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons, which places additional restriction on certain data transactions involving countries of concern (e.g., China, Russia, Iran) and covered persons (i.e., individuals and entities who are
Table of Contents
designated as such by the U.S. Attorney General or considered “foreign persons” and are majority owned by, organized under the laws of, a primary resident in, or a contractor of, a covered person or country of concern, as applicable) that impacts certain business activities such as vendor engagements, sale or sharing of data, employment of certain individuals, and investor agreements. Violations of the rule could lead to significant civil and criminal fines and penalties. The rule applies regardless of whether data is anonymized, key-coded, pseudonymized, de-identified or encrypted, which presents particular challenges for companies like ours that process key-coded clinical trial data and biospecimens.
In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are also bound by other contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful.
Each of these laws, rules, regulations and contractual obligations relating to data privacy and security, and any other such changes or new laws, rules, regulations or contractual obligations could impose significant limitations, require changes to our business, or restrict our collection, use, storage or processing of personal information, which may increase our compliance expenses and make our business more costly or less efficient to conduct. In addition, any such changes could compromise our ability to develop an adequate marketing strategy and pursue our growth strategy effectively or even prevent us from providing certain products in jurisdictions in which we currently operate and in which we may operate in the future or incur potential liability in an effort to comply with such legislation, which, in turn, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Complying with these numerous, complex and often changing regulations is expensive and difficult, and failure to comply with any data privacy or security obligations, whether by us, one of our CROs, CMOs or another third party with whom we work, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, including but not limited to: regulatory investigation costs; material fines and penalties; compensatory, special, punitive and statutory damages; litigation (including class claims); consent orders regarding our data privacy and security practices; requirements that we provide notices, bans on processing personal information (including clinical trial data), orders to destroy or not use personal information, credit monitoring services and/or credit restoration services or other relevant services to impacted individuals in the event of an information security incident impacting personal information; adverse actions against our licenses to do business; reputational damage; and injunctive relief. The implementation of the GDPR has increased our responsibility and liability in relation to sensitive information that we process, including in clinical trials, that is subject to the GDPR, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to comply with the GDPR and other applicable laws and regulations, which could divert management’s attention and increase our cost of doing business. In addition, new regulation or legislative actions regarding data privacy and security (together with applicable industry standards) may increase our costs of doing business. For instance, in Europe, the second Network and Information Security Directive (“NIS2”) aims to improve the resilience and incident response capabilities of entities operating in a number of sectors, including the health sector. Non-compliance with NIS2, as applicable to us, may lead to administrative fines of a maximum of €10 million or up to 2% of the total worldwide turnover of the preceding financial year. In this regard, we expect that there will continue to be new proposed laws, regulations and industry standards relating to privacy, data protection and security in the United States, the EEA, the UK and other jurisdictions, and we cannot determine the impact such future laws, regulations and standards may have on our business.
We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our data privacy and security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties with whom we work may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. Any actual or perceived failure by us or third parties with whom we work to comply with any federal, state or foreign laws, rules, regulations, industry self-regulatory principles, industry standards or codes of conduct, regulatory guidance, orders to which we (or third parties with whom we work) may be subject or other legal obligations relating to privacy, data protection, data security or consumer protection could adversely affect our reputation, brand and business. We may also be contractually required to indemnify and hold harmless third parties from the costs or consequences of non-compliance with any laws, rules and regulations or other legal obligations relating to privacy or any inadvertent or unauthorized use or disclosure, or other compromise of data that we store or handle as part of operating our business. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including clinical trials and the development of product candidates); inability to process personal information or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class
Table of Contents
claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations.
We cannot assure you that our CROs, CMOs or other third-party service providers with access to our or our suppliers’, manufacturers’, trial participants’, employees’ and others’ sensitive information in relation to which we are responsible will not breach contractual obligations imposed by us, or that they will not experience data security incidents, which could have a corresponding effect on our business, including putting us in breach of our obligations including under privacy laws and regulations and/or which could in turn adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We cannot assure you that our contractual measures and our own privacy and security-related safeguards will protect us from the risks associated with the third-party processing of such information. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We also publicly post privacy policies, marketing materials, whitepapers, and other statements concerning data privacy, security, and our collection, use, disclosure and other processing of the personal information provided to us or that we collect. Although we endeavor to comply with our public statements and documentation, we may at times fail to do so or be perceived to have failed to do so. Regulators in the United States and elsewhere are increasingly scrutinizing these statements, and our publication of our privacy policies and other statements we publish that provide promises and assurances about data privacy and security can subject us to potential claims if they are found to be deceptive, unfair, misleading, or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Any actual or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws, rules or regulations, industry standards, contractual or other legal obligations, or any actual, perceived or suspected cybersecurity incident, whether or not resulting in unauthorized access to, or acquisition, release, transfer or other compromise of personal information or other sensitive information, may result in enforcement actions and prosecutions, private litigation (including class action claims), significant fines, penalties (including bans on processing personal information or orders to destroy or not use personal information) and censure, claims for damages by affected individuals, regulatory inquiries and investigations or adverse publicity and could cause reputational harm, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. The successful assertion of one or more large data privacy or security claims against us that exceeds our available insurance coverage, or results in changes to our insurance policies (including premium increases or the imposition of large deductible or co-insurance requirements), could have an adverse effect on our business. In addition, we cannot be sure that our existing insurance coverage will continue to be available on acceptable terms or that our insurers will not deny coverage as to any future claim.
Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties
We may have conflicts with any current or future licensors, licensees, collaborators or strategic partners that could delay or prevent the development or commercialization of our product candidates.
We are currently party to the Kaken Collaboration Agreement and the license and collaboration agreement with Pierre Fabre, and we may enter into strategic transactions in the future, and we may have conflicts with our current or future licensors, licensees, collaborators or strategic partners, such as conflicts concerning the interpretation of preclinical or clinical data, the achievement of milestones, the interpretation of contractual obligations, payments for services, development obligations or the ownership of intellectual property developed during our collaboration. If any conflicts arise with our collaborators, such collaborator may act in a manner that is adverse to our best interests. Any such disagreement could result in one or more of the following, each of which could delay or prevent the development or commercialization of our product candidates, and in turn prevent us from generating revenue: disputes regarding milestone payments or royalties; uncertainty regarding ownership of intellectual property rights arising from our collaborative activities, which could prevent us from entering into future additional collaborations; unwillingness by such collaborator to cooperate in the development or manufacture of a product candidate, including providing us with data or materials; unwillingness on the part of a collaborator to keep us informed regarding the progress of its development and commercialization activities or to permit public disclosure of the results of those activities; initiating of litigation or alternative dispute resolution options by either party to resolve the dispute; or attempts by either party to terminate the agreement.
We have relied and expect to continue to rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If
Table of Contents
those third parties do not perform as contractually required, fail to satisfy legal or regulatory requirements, miss expected deadlines or terminate the relationship, our development programs could be delayed, more costly or unsuccessful, and we may never be able to seek or obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates.
We rely and intend to rely in the future on third-party clinical investigators, CROs and clinical data management organizations to conduct, supervise and monitor preclinical studies and clinical trials of our current or future product candidates. Because we currently rely and intend to continue to rely on these third parties, we will have less control over the timing, quality and other aspects of preclinical studies and clinical trials than we would have if we had conducted them independently. These parties are not, and will not be, our employees and we will have limited control over the amount of time and resources that they dedicate to our programs. Additionally, such parties may have contractual relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, which may draw time and resources from our programs.
We have no experience as a company in submitting and supporting the applications necessary to gain regulatory approvals. Securing regulatory approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to regulatory authorities for each indication to establish the product candidate’s safety or efficacy for that indication. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites by, applicable regulatory authorities.
Large-scale clinical trials require significant financial and management resources, and reliance on third-party clinical investigators, CROs, partners or consultants. Relying on third-party clinical investigators or CROs may force us to encounter delays and challenges that are outside of our control. We may not be able to demonstrate sufficient comparability between products manufactured at different facilities to allow for inclusion of the clinical results from participants treated with products from these different facilities, in our product registrations. Further, our third-party clinical manufacturers may not be able to manufacture our product candidates or otherwise fulfill their obligations to us because of interruptions to their business, including the loss of their key staff or interruptions to their raw material supply.
Our reliance on these third parties for development activities will reduce our control over these activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable trial protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs, clinical trial sites, and other third parties does not relieve us of these responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies are conducted in accordance with good laboratory practices, where applicable, and clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCPs and applicable rules. Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with GCP for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. Regulatory authorities enforce these requirements through periodic inspections (including through inspections that may be conducted once we submit an NDA to the FDA) of trial sponsors, clinical investigators, trial sites and certain third parties including CROs. If we, our CROs, clinical trial sites, or other third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP or other regulatory requirements, we or they may be subject to enforcement or other legal actions, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. Moreover, our business may be significantly impacted if our CROs, clinical investigators or other third parties violate federal or state healthcare fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws, and foreign equivalents.
In the event we need to repeat, extend, delay or terminate our clinical trials because these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, our clinical trials may need to be repeated, extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, regulatory approvals for our product candidates, and we will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates or we or they may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed. To the extent we are unable to successfully identify and manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be materially and adversely affected.
Table of Contents
If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into alternative arrangements or do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional contractors involves additional cost and time and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays could occur, which could compromise our ability to meet our desired development timelines. In addition, if an agreement with any of our future collaborators terminates, our access to technology and intellectual property licensed to us by that collaborator may be restricted or terminate entirely, which may delay our continued development of our product candidates utilizing the collaborator’s technology or intellectual property or require us to stop development of those product candidates completely.
In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may conclude that a financial relationship between us and/or a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities and may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of one or more of our product candidates.
We rely on third-party manufacturers and suppliers to supply our product candidates. The loss of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers, or their failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or to supply sufficient quantities at acceptable quality levels or prices, within acceptable timeframes, or at all, would materially and adversely affect our business.
We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities for drug manufacturing, storage, distribution or quality testing. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of API, bulk drug substances, raw materials, samples, components and other materials for our product candidates for clinical testing, as well as for the manufacture of any products candidates that we commercialize, if approved. Reliance on third-party manufacturers may expose us to different risks than if we were to manufacture product candidates ourselves. There can be no assurance that our preclinical and clinical development product supplies will not be limited, interrupted, terminated or will be of satisfactory quality or be available at acceptable prices. In addition, if any biotechnology companies or CMOs become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, or other regulatory requirements by the U.S. government, such actions could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such entities. Such disruption could have adverse effects on the development of our product candidates and our business operations. Also, any replacement of our manufacturer could require significant effort and time because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements.
We obtain our preclinical and clinical supplies from our manufacturers on a purchase order basis, and currently do not have long-term supply arrangements in place. The manufacturing process for our product candidates is subject to the FDA and foreign regulatory authority review. We, and our suppliers and manufacturers, must meet applicable manufacturing requirements and undergo rigorous facility and process validation tests required by regulatory authorities in order to comply with regulatory standards, such as cGMPs. If our CMOs cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we may not be able to rely on their facilities for the manufacture of elements of our product candidates. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the FDA, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority determines that our third-party manufacturers’ facilities are not in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including those governing cGMPs, they may deny any NDA or marketing application we submit until the deficiencies are corrected or we replace the manufacturer in our application with a manufacturer that is able to demonstrate a compliance status acceptable to the FDA or foreign regulatory authority. Moreover, we are dependent on our CMOs for manufacturing in compliance with cGMPs and other regulatory requirements. In the event that any of our manufacturers fails to comply with such requirements or to perform its obligations in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our projected manufacturing capacity or supply of materials becomes limited, interrupted, or more costly than anticipated, we may be forced to enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do timely or on reasonable terms, if at all. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be
Table of Contents
unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such to another third party. These factors would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturer in order to enable us, or to have another third party, manufacture our product candidates. We will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with applicable quality standards and regulations and guidelines; and we may be required to repeat some of the development program. If we are required to change manufacturers, the delays and costs associated with the verification of a new manufacturer, whether due to failure to comply with regulatory requirements, or quality, timing and supply issues, or other reason, could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget.
As part of our process development efforts, we also may make changes to the manufacturing processes at various points during development, for various reasons, such as controlling costs, achieving scale, decreasing processing time, improving product formulations, increasing manufacturing success rate or other reasons. For example, we are implementing certain manufacturing process changes for envu to increase scalability with respect to our Phase 3 clinical trials. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve their intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause our current or future product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of our future clinical trials. In some circumstances, changes in the manufacturing process may require us to perform ex vivo comparability studies or clinical bridging studies, and we may be required to collect additional data from participants prior to undertaking more advanced clinical trials. For instance, changes in our process during the course of clinical development may require us to show the comparability of the product used in earlier clinical phases or at earlier portions of a trial to the product used in later clinical phases or later portions of the trial.
We expect to continue to rely on third-party manufacturers if we receive regulatory approval for any product candidate. To the extent that we enter into future long-term manufacturing arrangements with third parties, we will depend on these third parties to perform their obligations in a timely manner consistent with contractual and regulatory requirements, including those related to quality control and assurance. Any manufacturing facilities used to produce our product candidates will be subject to periodic review and inspection by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including for continued compliance with cGMP requirements, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents. If we are unable to obtain or maintain third-party manufacturing for product candidates, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, we may not be able to develop and commercialize our product candidates successfully. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements, comply with cGMPs or maintain a compliance status acceptable to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:
an inability to initiate or continue preclinical studies or clinical trials of product candidates;
delay in submitting regulatory applications, or receiving regulatory approvals, for product candidates;
loss of the cooperation of future collaborators;
sanctions being imposed on us, including shutdown of the third-party vendor or invalidation of drug product lots or processes, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures of product candidates or drugs, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions;
requirements to cease distribution or to recall batches of our product candidates; and
in the event of approval to market and commercialize a product candidate, an inability to meet commercial demands for our products.
Additionally, our CMOs may experience difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If our CMOs were to encounter any of these difficulties, our ability to provide our product candidates to participants in preclinical and clinical trials, or to provide product for treatment of participants once approved, would be jeopardized.
Table of Contents
We depend on limited source suppliers for certain raw materials used in our product candidates. If we are unable to source these supplies on a timely basis or establish redundancy in our manufacturing process or longer-term contracts with our CMOs, we will not be able to complete our clinical trials on time and the development of our product candidates may be delayed.
Certain of the raw materials necessary to produce envu and A-005 are in limited supply, and we generally rely on one CMO for each manufacturing stage. While we intend to identify and qualify additional suppliers and redundant manufacturers to provide the API, drug product and critical raw material prior to submission of an NDA to the FDA and/or a comparable marketing application outside the United States, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in doing so. Furthermore, any of the limited source suppliers upon whom we rely could stop producing our supplies, cease operations or be acquired by, or enter into exclusive arrangements with, our competitors. Establishing redundancy in CMOs and additional or replacement suppliers for these supplies, and obtaining regulatory authorizations that may result from adding or replacing CMOs and suppliers, could take a substantial amount of time, result in increased costs and impair our ability to produce our products, which would adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Any such interruption or delay may force us to seek similar supplies from alternative sources, which may not be available at reasonable prices, or at all. Any interruption in the supply of limited source components for our product candidates would adversely affect our ability to meet scheduled timelines and budget for the development and commercialization of our product candidates, could result in higher expenses and would harm our business. Although we have not experienced any significant disruption as a result of our reliance on limited source suppliers, we have a limited operating history and cannot assure you that we will not experience disruptions in our supply chain in the future as a result of such reliance or otherwise.
In addition, we do not currently have long-term supply contracts with our CMOs, and they are not obligated to supply drug products to us for any period, in any specified quantity or at any certain price beyond the delivery contemplated by the relevant purchase orders. As a result, our suppliers could stop selling to us at commercially reasonable prices, or at all. While we intend to enter into long-term master supply agreements with certain of our CMOs prior to any potential NDA submission, we may not be successful in negotiating such agreements on favorable terms or at all. If we do enter into such long-term master supply agreements, or enter into such agreements on less favorable terms than we currently have with such manufacturers, we could be subject to binding long-term purchase obligations that may be harmful to our business, including in the event that we do not conduct our trials on planned timelines, or at all, or utilize the drug products that we are required to purchase. Any change in our relationships with our CMOs or changes to the contractual terms of our agreements with them could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
The operations of our suppliers, most of which are located outside of the United States, are subject to additional risks that are beyond our control and that could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Currently, most of our suppliers are located outside of the United States. As a result of our global suppliers, we are subject to risks associated with doing business abroad, including:
political unrest, terrorism, labor disputes, and economic instability resulting in the disruption of trade from foreign countries in which our products are manufactured;
the imposition of new laws and regulations, including those relating to labor conditions, quality, and safety standards, imports, duties, taxes, and other charges on imports, as well as trade restrictions and restrictions on currency exchange or the transfer of funds, particularly new or increased tariffs imposed on imports from countries where our suppliers operate;
fluctuations in currency exchange rates over time, which may substantially increase our costs of doing business abroad where we have payment obligations in local currency;
greater challenges and increased costs with enforcing and periodically auditing or reviewing our suppliers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with cGMPs or status acceptable to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities;
Table of Contents
reduced protection for intellectual property rights, including trademark protection, in some countries particularly China;
disruptions in operations due to global, regional, or local public health crises or other emergencies or natural disasters, including, for example, disruptions experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic;
disruptions or delays in shipments; and
changes in local economic conditions in countries where our manufacturers or suppliers are located.
These and other factors beyond our control could interrupt our suppliers’ production, influence the ability of our suppliers to export our clinical supplies cost-effectively or at all, and inhibit our suppliers’ ability to procure certain materials, any of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We may be exposed to significant currency exchange risk.
We operate a number of our clinical trials outside of the United States and incur portions of our expenses, and may in the future derive revenues, in a variety of currencies. As a result, we are exposed to currency exchange risk as our results of operations and cash flows are subject to fluctuations in currency exchange rates. Fluctuations in currency exchange rates have had, and will continue to have, an impact on our results as expressed in United States dollars. We currently do not have a formal hedging program with respect to foreign currencies. We cannot predict the impact of foreign currency fluctuations, and foreign currency fluctuations in the future may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock
An active and liquid trading market for our common stock may not develop, and you may not be able to resell your shares of common stock at or above the price you paid for them.
An active trading market for our common stock may never develop or, if it is developed, be sustained. The market value of our common stock may decrease from the price you paid for them. As a result of these and other factors, including our limited public float, you may be unable to resell your shares of our common stock at or above the price you paid for them. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of your shares. Furthermore, an inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock and may impair our ability to enter into strategic collaborations or acquire companies or products by using our shares of common stock as consideration.
Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly or may fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts or any guidance we may publicly provide, each of which may cause our stock price to fluctuate or decline.
We expect our operating results to be subject to quarterly and annual fluctuations which may, in turn, cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate substantially. Our net loss and other operating results will be affected by numerous factors, including:
variations in the level of expense related to the ongoing development of our most advanced product candidate envu, A-005 and other development programs;
results and timing of preclinical studies and ongoing and future clinical trials, or the addition or termination of any such clinical trials;
the timing of payments we may make or receive under any current or future license and future collaboration
Table of Contents
arrangements or the termination or modification thereof;
our execution of any strategic transactions, including any future acquisitions, collaborations, licenses or similar arrangements, and the timing and amount of payments we may make or receive in connection with such transactions;
any intellectual property infringement lawsuit or opposition, interference or cancellation proceeding in which we may become involved;
recruitment and departures of key personnel;
if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, the terms of such approval and market acceptance and demand for such products;
regulatory developments affecting our product candidates or those of our competitors;
fluctuations in stock-based compensation expense;
the impacts of inflation and rising interest rates on our business and operations; and
changes in general market and economic conditions.
If our quarterly or annual operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts or any forecasts or guidance we may provide to the market, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide. We believe that quarterly or annual comparisons of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication of our future performance.
Our stock price is likely to continue to be volatile, which could result in substantial losses for our investors.
The market price of our common stock is likely to continue to be volatile and could fluctuate widely in response to many factors, including but not limited to:
announcements regarding our ability and anticipated timelines to submit applications for regulatory approvals of envu in PsO;
regulatory approval or non-approval of envu in PsO, specific label indications for or restrictions, warnings or limitations in its use or delays in the regulatory review process;
volatility and instability in the financial and capital markets;
announcements relating to our product candidates, including the results of clinical trials by us or any future collaborators;
announcements by competitors that impact our competitive outlook;
negative developments with respect to our product candidates, or similar products or product candidates with which we compete;
developments with respect to patents or intellectual property rights;
announcements of technological innovations, new product candidates, new products or new contracts by us or
Table of Contents
our competitors;
announcements relating to any future strategic transactions, including acquisitions, collaborations, licenses or similar arrangements;
our ability to achieve the perceived benefits of our strategic transactions, including the ACELYRIN Merger, as rapidly or to the extent anticipated by financial analysts or investors;
actual or anticipated variations in our operating results due to the level of development expenses and other factors;
changes in financial estimates by equities research analysts and whether our earnings (or losses) meet or exceed such estimates;
announcement or expectation of additional financing efforts and receipt, or lack of receipt, of funding in support of conducting our business;
sales of our common stock by us, our insiders, or other stockholders, or issuances by us of shares of our common stock in connection with strategic transactions;
conditions and trends in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other industries;
regulatory developments within, and outside of, the United States, including changes in the structure of health care payment systems;
litigation or arbitration;
COVID-19 or other pandemics, natural disasters, or major catastrophic events;
general economic, political and market conditions and other factors; and
the occurrence of any of the risks described in this section titled “Risk Factors.”
In recent years, the stock market in general, and the market for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in particular, has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to changes in the operating performance of the companies whose stock is experiencing those price and volume fluctuations. Broad market and industry factors may seriously affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock could cause our stock price to fall.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly.
We cannot predict what effect, if any, sales of our shares in the public market or the availability of shares for sale will have on the market price of our common stock. However, future sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market or the perception that such sales may occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
We also expect that significant additional capital may be needed in the future to continue our planned operations, including conducting our planned clinical trials, manufacturing and commercialization efforts, expanded research and development activities and costs associated with operating as a public company. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce
Table of Contents
the market price of our common stock.
Our principal stockholders and management own a significant percentage of our common stock and will be able to control matters subject to stockholder approval.
Based on the beneficial ownership of our capital stock as of December 31, 2025, our executive officers, directors, holders of 5% or more of our capital stock and their respective affiliates beneficially owned approximately 41% of our outstanding voting stock. The interests of these stockholders may not be the same as or may even conflict with your interests. For example, these stockholders could delay or prevent a change of control of our company, even if such a change of control would benefit our other stockholders, which could deprive our stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their common stock as part of a sale of our company or our assets and might affect the prevailing market price of our common stock. The significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock due to investors’ perception that conflicts of interest may exist or arise. In addition, as a result of this concentration of ownership, there is a limited number of shares of our common stock that are not held by officers, directors and controlling stockholders (which is referred to as our public float), thereby adversely impacting the liquidity of our common stock and potentially depressing the price at which you may be able to sell shares of common stock.
We are an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” and the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.
We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in Section 2(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), as modified by the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to the other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies,” including (i) not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (ii) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and (iii) exemptions from the requirements of holding nonbinding advisory stockholder votes on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not approved previously. We may choose to take advantage of some, but not all, of the available exemptions. We have taken advantage of reduced reporting obligations in this report. In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. These provisions allow an emerging growth company to delay the adoption of these accounting standards until they would otherwise apply to private companies. We have elected to take advantage of such extended transition period. We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive as a result of its reliance on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock to be less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and the price of our common stock may be more volatile than the current trading market and price of our common stock.
Further, there is no guarantee that the exemptions available under the JOBS Act will result in significant savings. To the extent that we choose not to use exemptions from various reporting requirements under the JOBS Act, we will incur additional compliance costs, which may impact our financial condition.
We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of: (i) the end of the fiscal year in which we have a total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion; (ii) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering (“IPO”); (iii) the date on which we have, during the previous three-year period, issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt; or (iv) the end of the fiscal year in which the market value of common stock held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30. Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may continue to qualify as a smaller reporting company, which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation. In addition, as a smaller reporting company with less than $100 million in annual revenue, we are not required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could prevent or delay an acquisition of us that may be beneficial to our stockholders and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.
Table of Contents
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change in control of our company. These provisions could also make it difficult for stockholders to elect directors who are not nominated by current members of our board of directors or take other corporate actions, including effecting changes in our management. These provisions:
establish a classified board of directors so that not all members of our board are elected at one time;
permit only the board of directors to establish the number of directors and fill vacancies on the board;
provide that directors may only be removed “for cause” and only with the approval of two-thirds of our stockholders;
require super-majority voting to amend some provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws;
authorize the issuance of “blank check” preferred stock that our board could use to implement a stockholder rights plan;
eliminate the ability of our stockholders to call special meetings of stockholders;
prohibit stockholder action by written consent, which requires all stockholder actions to be taken at a meeting of our stockholders;
prohibit cumulative voting; and
establish advance notice requirements for nominations for election to our board or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at annual stockholder meetings.
In addition, Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (“DGCL”) may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company. Section 203 imposes certain restrictions on mergers, business combinations and other transactions between us and holders of 15% or more of our common stock.
The exclusive forum provisions in our organizational documents may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers or employees, or the underwriters of any offering giving rise to such claim, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, to the fullest extent permitted by law, provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for: any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, or our amended and restated bylaws; or any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act.
This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or other employees, or the underwriters of any offering giving rise to such claims, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Our amended and restated bylaws provide that the federal district courts of the United States of America will, to the fullest extent permitted by law,
Table of Contents
be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act (the “Federal Forum Provision”), including for all causes of action asserted against any defendant named in such complaint. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision is intended to benefit and may be enforced by us, our officers and directors, the underwriters to any offering giving rise to such complaint, and any other professional entity whose profession gives authority to a statement made by that person or entity and who has prepared or certified any part of the documents underlying the offering. Our decision to adopt a Federal Forum Provision followed a decision by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware holding that such provisions are facially valid under Delaware law. While federal or other state courts may not follow the holding of the Delaware Supreme Court or may determine that the Federal Forum Provision should be enforced in a particular case, application of the Federal Forum Provision means that suits brought by our stockholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act must be brought in federal court and cannot be brought in state court, and our stockholders cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. In addition, neither the exclusive forum provision nor the Federal Forum Provision applies to suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Accordingly, actions by our stockholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder must be brought in federal court, and our stockholders cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.
Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to our exclusive forum provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, including the Federal Forum Provision. These provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim, and may result in increased costs for a stockholder to bring such a claim, in a judicial forum of their choosing for disputes with us or our directors, officers, other employees or agents, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers, other employees or agents.
Our board of directors is authorized to issue and designate shares of our preferred stock without stockholder approval.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation authorizes our board of directors, without the approval of our stockholders, to issue shares of preferred stock, subject to limitations prescribed by applicable law, rules and regulations and the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, and to establish from time to time the number of shares of preferred stock to be included in each such series and to fix the designation, powers, preferences and rights of the shares of each such series and the qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereof. The powers, preferences and rights of these additional series of convertible preferred stock may be senior to or on parity with our common stock, which may reduce our common stock’s value.
Because we do not anticipate paying any dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gain.
We have never declared nor paid dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain all of our future earnings, if any, to finance the growth and development, operation and expansion of our business and we do not anticipate declaring or paying any dividends in the foreseeable future. As a result, capital appreciation of our common stock, which may never occur, will be your sole source of gain on your investment for the foreseeable future.
The dual class structure of our common stock may limit your ability to influence corporate matters and may limit your visibility with respect to certain transactions.
The dual class structure of our common stock may limit your ability to influence corporate matters. Holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote per share, while holders of our non-voting common stock are not entitled to any votes. Nonetheless, each share of our non-voting common stock may be converted at any time into one share of our common stock at the option of its holder by providing written notice to us, subject to the ownership and other limitations provided for in our certificate of incorporation. Consequently, if holders of our non-voting common stock exercise their option to make this conversion, this will have the effect of increasing the relative voting power of those prior holders of our non-voting common stock, and correspondingly decreasing the voting power of the holders of our common stock, which may limit your ability to influence corporate matters. Additionally, stockholders who hold, in the aggregate, more than 10% of
Table of Contents
our common stock and non-voting common stock, but 10% or less of our common stock, and are not otherwise an insider, may not be required to report changes in their ownership due to transactions in our non-voting common stock pursuant to Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, and may not be subject to the short-swing profit provisions of Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act.
General Risk Factors
Unstable economic and market conditions may have serious adverse consequences on our business, financial condition and stock price.
Global economic and business activities continue to face widespread uncertainties, and global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions in the past several years, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, rising inflation and monetary supply shifts, rising interest rates, labor shortages, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates, recession risks and uncertainty about economic and geopolitical stability (for example, related to the evolving U.S. and ex-U.S. tariff landscape). The extent of the impact of these conditions on our operational and financial performance, including our ability to execute our business strategies and initiatives in the expected timeframe, as well as that of third parties upon whom we rely, will depend on future developments which are uncertain and cannot be predicted. There can be no assurance that further deterioration in economic or market conditions will not occur, or how long these challenges will persist. If the current equity and credit markets further deteriorate, or do not improve, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly and more dilutive. Furthermore, our stock price may decline due in part to the volatility of the stock market and the general economic downturn.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or if they publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock is influenced in part by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. We do not have any control over the industry or securities analysts, or the content and opinions included in their reports and may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If no or few securities or industry analysts commence coverage of us, or if analysts cease coverage of us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, and the trading price for our common stock could be impacted negatively. If any of the analysts who cover us publish inaccurate or unfavorable research or opinions regarding us, our business model, our intellectual property or our stock performance, or if our preclinical studies and clinical trials and operating results fail to meet the expectations of analysts, our stock price would likely decline.
We incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management is required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.
As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Securities Act, the Exchange Act, Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Global Select Market and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel will continue to need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, we expect these rules and regulations to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly, particularly after we are no longer an emerging growth company. We cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers. The increased costs may require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business. Moreover, these rules and regulations are often subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices.
Table of Contents
Failure to establish and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could adversely affect our business and if investors lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected.
We are not currently required to comply with the rules of the SEC implementing Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act which requires including an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. However, we are required to comply with the SEC’s rules implementing Sections 302 and 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which require our management to certify financial and other information in our quarterly and annual reports and provide an annual management report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Although we will be required to disclose changes made in our internal control over financial reporting on a quarterly basis, we will not be required to make our first annual assessment of our internal control over financial reporting until our second annual report on Form 10-K. Furthermore, as an emerging growth company, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting until the later of the year following our first annual report required to be filed with the SEC or the date we are no longer an emerging growth company. At such time, our independent registered public accounting firm would need to issue a report that is adverse in the event that there are material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting.
To comply with the requirements of being a public company, we have undertaken various actions, and will need to take additional actions, such as implementing numerous internal controls and procedures and hiring additional accounting or internal audit staff or consultants. Testing and maintaining internal controls can divert our management’s attention from other matters that are important to the operation of our business. Additionally, when evaluating our internal control over financial reporting, we may identify material weaknesses that we may not be able to remediate in time to meet the applicable deadline imposed upon us for compliance with the requirements of Section 404(b). If we identify any material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting or are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404(b) in a timely manner or assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting once we are no longer an emerging growth company, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected, and we could become subject to investigations by the stock exchange on which our securities are listed, the SEC or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources. In addition, if we fail to remedy any material weakness, our financial statements could be inaccurate, and we could face restricted access to capital markets.
Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.
We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We have designed our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. Any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertently fail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make any related party transaction disclosures. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected. In addition, we do not have a formal risk management program for identifying and addressing risks to our business in other areas.
ACELYRIN has been named a defendant in a purported securities class action lawsuit, and we may be the target of other securities litigation in the future. This could result in substantial damages or other expenses and could divert management’s time and attention from our business.
In connection with the ACELYRIN Merger, we assumed the liabilities of ACELYRIN, which include a purported federal securities class action lawsuit which was commenced against ACELYRIN in the United States District Court for the
Table of Contents
Central District of California (the “Court”) on November 15, 2023. On February 15, 2024, the Court appointed joint lead plaintiffs and lead counsel. An amended complaint was filed on March 26, 2024, naming ACELYRIN and current and former officers and directors as defendants. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Exchange Act and Securities Act in disclosures regarding the primary endpoint of HiSCR75 at week 16 not meeting statistical significance in ACELYRIN’s Phase 2b trial of izokibep in hidradenitis suppurativa. The amended complaint seeks damages and an award of reasonable costs and expenses, as well as such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. On May 3, 2024, the defendants filed their motion to dismiss the amended complaint, which was granted by the court, with leave to amend, in January 2026. On February 5, 2026, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint which seeks damages and an award of reasonable costs and expenses, as well as such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. On February 19, 2026, the defendants filed their motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, which remains pending. This lawsuit is subject to inherent uncertainties, including its outcome. We could be forced to expend significant resources and incur substantial legal fees and costs in the defense of this suit, and we may not prevail. We have not established any reserve for any potential liability relating to this lawsuit. It is possible that we could, in the future, incur judgments or enter into settlements of claims for monetary damages. In addition, we may be the target of other securities litigation in the future. Securities litigation (including the cost to defend against, and any potential adverse outcome resulting from any such proceeding) can be expensive and time-consuming, damage our reputation and divert our management’s attention from other business concerns, which could seriously harm our business.
